User talk:Kiro Bassem

August 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to List of designated terrorist groups 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: List of designated terrorist groups was changed by Kiro Bassem (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.955454 on 2020-08-13T21:51:35+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additions to Coptic Orthodox Church Page

Hello Kiro and thanks for your contributions.

I noticed that you made some changes to the coptic orthodox church page and wanted to give you some feedback regarding the regulations of making additions to wikipedia.

Firstly, You added some information regarding coptic christians purportedly being descendant of the pharaohs- unfortunately as you did not cite this information, it is not verifiable. I am familiar with your claim and as such you might perhaps want to include this information in a new section on the page such as "common attitudes" or "coptic identity" in which you elaborate (with citations) on this information

Secondly, you removed some information regarding the separation of the British orthodox church from the coptic church. If you look at the history of the matter you will find that the coptic church has an amicable relationship with the British church but that they did indeed join and separate at some point. Removal of information like this is considered vandalism and could result in a ban from editing if repeated offences occur. That being said Would like to give you the benefit of the doubt (I will not give you an official warning or report you whatsoever).

Thanks again for your additions and I hope you contribute to the coptic church page again :)

Happy editing, --Titus Obelisk (talk) 01:39, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I deleted the separation of the British orthothox church by mistake Kiro Bassem (talk) 01:44, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I have fixed it but I can't Link the British orthothox church in blue as it was. Kiro Bassem (talk) 02:03, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No worries Kiro, it is fixed now. --Titus Obelisk (talk) 04:15, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kiro Bassem, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Kiro Bassem! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Naypta (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Likely copyvios on Sophia of Egypt

Your addition to Sophia of Egypt has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information.

Nomination of Sophia of Egypt for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sophia of Egypt is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sophia of Egypt 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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:07, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, delete the page as fast as possible, I don't want it anymore Kiro Bassem (talk) 19:31, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Saint Maurice. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Gyrofrog (talk) 05:56, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arab–Israeli conflict restrictions

Per the edit notice at Quds Force, which refers to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles, you are not permitted to edit it, or any other page relating to the Arab–Israeli conflict as you have under 500 edits. FDW777 (talk) 13:44, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I didn't know Kiro Bassem (talk) 13:52, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's no problem. Could you confirm whether you have also been editing as 105.192.205.157 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) please? FDW777 (talk) 14:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, from another mobile، but hey don't delete my last Edit I did on List of designated terrorist groups, It has nothing related to the Arab_Israeli conflict. Kiro Bassem (talk) 14:29, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't planning to. I do recommend you only edit while logged in, especially if editing in potentially controversial areas like you do. An added bonus of editing while logged in means you'll get to 500 edits sooner. FDW777 (talk) 14:53, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you are not permitted to edit pages relating to the Arab–Israeli conflict as you have less than 500 edits. Here you make an edit relating to Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine, which is unquestionably relating to the Arab–Israeli conflict. Please stop editing any article relating to the conflict, or content relating to the conflict in articles covering a broader scope, or I will take this to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. Thank you. FDW777 (talk) 20:03, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok,I will delete it Kiro Bassem (talk) 20:14, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my mobile has Glitched can you please delete it by yourself, Thanks Kiro Bassem (talk) 20:22, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not planning to delete anything. All I'm asking is that you stop making edits relating to the Arab–Israeli conflict until you have 500 edits, as until then you should not be editing in that area. Thank you. FDW777 (talk) 20:33, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What's up bro, now I have passed 500 edits and became an Extended Confirmed user, I can now edit things related to the Arab Israeli conflict. Kiro Bassem (talk) 15:16, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions 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.

FDW777 (talk) 20:06, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah

Hello. I saw your edit just now on Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah. Since there's already been an edit war there, I would suggest that it's best that everyone leave the issue be until we can get a consensus on the talk page. I've argued on that page that we should at least temporarily maintain the "reportedly dead" footing as a BLP matter, so that may be a better place for you to make your argument than in edit summaries to the article itself, as continued edit-warring by autoconfirmed accounts could get the article fully protected, which no one wants.

Also, please do not change the protection level listed in templates, if the level you're changing to is incorrect. It's only a 24-hour semi, and therefor {{pp-semi-indef}} is inapplicable. Tamzin (they/them) | o toki tawa mi. 23:48, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Kiro Bassem (talk) 23:51, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A follow-up question: I see that another user has alleged that you're also 105.194.48.182 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). While you don't have to respond to that claim, since acknowledging your IP address gives away personal information, I was wondering if you're able to confirm or deny that. Tamzin (they/them) | o toki tawa mi. 23:53, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, It's not me. I was just trying to give the right information, that his death was not yet 100% confirmed, that's it. I am not Even going to edit in Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah page again. Kiro Bassem (talk) 23:58, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just added Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah to the List of fugitives from justice who are no longer sought article. I could also use help with adding entries to lists like this. Would you be able to help me with that? I would be very thankful for any help. Davidgoodheart (talk) 16:41, 15 January 2021 (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) 02:58, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sayyid Qutb has been nominated for deletion

Category:Sayyid Qutb has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ChunnuBhai (talk) 08:48, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please add your signature on talk pages

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 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. – Fayenatic London 22:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I really need help with editing

Hi, do you think that you could help me add some entries to missing person's lists? I have my hands completely full with editing and could really use some help, and would be very thankful to get any help. Davidgoodheart (talk) 22:33, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For Sure I can help but I am very busy these days, My last edit I made on Wikipedia was from about 3 months ago. I hope I will come back soon. Kiro Bassem (talk) 12:54, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Muslim al-Turkmani / Abu Muhannad al-Suwaydawi / Abu Abdulrahman al-Bilawi

Hello thank your for your remarks.

I should've quoted my sources but I will soon. I am basing all these changes of ISIS' martyrs' --Mohamedtoure20 (talk) 16:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)biographies[reply]

All of their ISIS martyr’s biographies, Abu Muslim, Abu Muhannad and Abu Abdulrahman are explicit and I drew my modifications from them.

The biographies explicitly state that Abu Muhannad and Abu Abdulrahman (the biography actually calls him “Abu Abdulrahman al-Bilawi al-Anbari” and “Abu Usama al-Bilawi” at other times) were close “friends” and lieutenants of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. It is clearly stated that Abu Abdulrahman actually was among the founders of Jama’at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (which clearly shows that not only was he an Islamic hardliner before the 2003 invasion but he maybe he even joined the group before the start of the war).

Concerning Abu Muhannad, not only was he close to Zarqawi but he was at the first Battle of Fallujah which means he was a true believer in jihadism and Zarqawi from the get-go and most likely with Abu Musab before he explicitly pledges allegiance to Al-Qaeda, becoming it’s succursal. The biographies of Abu Muhannad and Abu Abdulrahman also imply (I may be wrong or the translation may be off) that they actually learned Quran and Islam during their schoolyears which is interesting meaning this could explain they already had a “religious” background even before entering the army.

Now considering Abu Muslim al-Turkmani, we’ll refer to him as “Abu Mutazz al-Qurayshi” since it is the kunya ISIS uses the most in its martyrs’ biography and official announcement about his death. His biography clearly states that he was radicalized to extremism by non-other than Abu Ali al-Anbari who was preaching and spreading extremism in and around Tel Afar (this even explains why the town was a longtime support base for the Jihadist insurgency during the war). I even remember reading and article by Hisham al-Hashimi (G-d rest his soul) corroborating this, saying that Abu Mutazz had been “influenced by Salafism in the 1990’s but didn’t disclose it to anyone”. The ISIS biography for Abu Ali says: • “He [al-Qaduli] cooperated with the mujahideen in the mountains of Kurdistan and worked with some familiar muwahideen in Tal Afar to build a jihadist group to carry out military operations against the Taghut regime of Saddam Husayn, his Jahili Party, and renegade soldiers and supporters. The military training of this group was led Shaykh Abu Mutaz al-Qurayshi—may Allah accept him—who was then among the dubat al-tayib [repentant officers] that had ceased to believe in Ba’athism and had renounced his loyalty to the Taghut and his apostate Army”.

Pretty sure this means Abu Mutazz left the army before the 2003 invasion and likely in the mid to late 1990’s when Ansar al-Islam and other groups forerunners to ISIS were taking root in northern Iraq.

--Mohamedtoure20 (talk) 16:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is what it says about Abu Abdulrahman being an important jihadist as early as 2003: "He was from the first forerunners in the jihad against the crusaders in the Land of the Two Rivers [Mesopotamia]. If you mention the ansar (local jihadists), then count him among the oldest, the most experienced, and the best. If you mention al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, then count him from among the fearless founders. If you mention the Islamic State, then count him among the establishers of its pillars and its great leaders. If you mention history, then count him from among the mujahideen, the victorious, and the heroes. And if you mention the people of bravery, bounty, and chivalry, then count him from among the core".

Nice Mohamedtoure20, but you should also state in Abu Muslim al-Turkmani that he was a member of Al-Qaeda in Iraq as you added in the infobox. Kiro Bassem (talk) 19:34, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Kiro. I will add more sources and clarifications. Turns out Haji Bakr was also a very early member of Jama'at al-Tawhid, a forerunner of Al-Qaeda in Iraq which is a forerunner of ISIS itself. I remember reading an article saying that Saddam's faith campaign program in the mid 1990's tolerated Islamic extremists in the army and that most future ISIS ex-army officers showed signs of radicalism during their days in the army but Saddam's government tolerated them but didn't give them high-ranking or commanding positions (which is why they're mostly majors, lieutenants, lieutenants colonels or colonels at best). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohamedtoure20 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to remove a page you created

You can request the removal of a page that you created by mistake by replacing its contents with the {{db-blanked}} template. As long as you were the page creator and the only author of any non-trivial content, it can be speedily deleted. Lithopsian (talk) 16:32, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sami Jasim Muhammad al-Jaburi

The article Sami Jasim Muhammad al-Jaburi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Mainly just cites the FBI and rewards for justice. Do we need a page for every single terrorist on Wikipedia?

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Thepharoah17 (talk) 18:30, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kiro Bassem. 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 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 ~~~~}}. ST47 (talk) 23:23, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sami Jasim Muhammad al-Jaburi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sami Jasim Muhammad al-Jaburi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sami Jasim Muhammad al-Jaburi 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.

Thepharoah17 (talk) 09:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting for unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kiro Bassem (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm really sorry for abusing multiple accounts but I have been an honest person and confessed on myself and I myself asked for being blocked and I told about all the accounts that I have been using here. Now, and after a long absence I really missed this place and I really missed editing here and I ask to be unblocked, I learned the lesson and I swear from now on I will not do this again, I promise.

Decline reason:

Confirmed block evasion via logged-out editing. This is a strike against you and counts toward a future WP:3X ban. Your best bet is to go six months with zero edits, then apply under WP:SO. Yamla (talk) 11:11, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

@Yamla: Yamla, most of the edits I made logged out were either removing vandalism that was made on a page and no one cared about it or a shared IP nothing else and I swore from now on that I will never do this, just unblock me, I really need a chance. Please reply. Kiro Bassem (talk) 11:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. You are free to make a new unblock request, but I'm afraid I view this as dishonesty and am unwilling to unblock you. I think your only path forward here is WP:SO but another admin may view this differently. --Yamla (talk) 11:26, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: Yamla, but I promised I will not do that again. I only want to contribute in Wikipedia and help it become bigger and better and I am not trying to vandalize it or ruin it. If I make any other edit while I'm logged out, you have the rights to ban me forever but just one more chance, I'm sorry, six months is a very long time. Kiro Bassem (talk) 11:42, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. You were dishonest in your unblock request and were violating WP:EVADE. You are free to make a new unblock request but I strongly believe you have demonstrated you need to remain blocked. --Yamla (talk) 13:06, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: Yamla, one more thing, If I try after six months to request for unblocking and I honestly didn't do any edit during that time, would my request be accepted? thanks for being patient. Kiro Bassem (talk) 13:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SO answers that in detail. You'd need to address the concerns that lead to your original block and you'd need to address your dishonesty from today. WP:SO is not a guarantee. --Yamla (talk) 13:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RickinBaltimore: RickinBaltimore Hi, can you please unblock me, It's been a very long time since I have been blocked, and I am really sorry. I have been blocked because I was using another account رايكر, but actually, I wasn't using this account for bad reasons or for cheating the system, you can clearly see my contributions, but because I thought that I really needed to use another account, I didn't at the very beginning realize, I was wrong and when I knew that I was wrong, I confessed on myself as you can see here and I myself asked to be blocked and If I have been using the account for bad reasons, I wouldn't have confessed on myself, I really need another chance. Note: to be honest, I have before used IPs for editing while I'm blocked, but I only did this to remove IP vandalism, I swear and I didn't use it for illegal reasons. Please unblock me and I swear, I won't do it again, just please give me one chance, and if I do it again, block me forever without return. Kiro Bassem (talk) 21:11, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed block evasion. As this is your third strike, WP:3X applies and you are now considered banned by the community. I will make a note of this on your user page. Six months from today is 2022-10-12. I very, very, very strongly suggest you cease all violations of WP:EVADE and WP:SOCK if you ever want to dig yourself out of this hole. And stop with the nonsense claims that block evasion is fine so long as you only do it to remove vandalism. You know perfectly well it isn't. --Yamla (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: Yamla Really, you think I wasn't using it to stop vandalism, OK see one of the Ips I have been using 197.52.1.155, I used it to tell @RickinBaltimore: about a cross-wiki promotion that was going on here and that the same page was being re-created multiple times and I didn't use this IP for any other reasons, and you can also ask @علاء: how I really fight vandalism here. Kiro Bassem (talk) 21:33, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you know perfectly well that reverting vandalism isn't a permitted reason to evade your block. All you've done is to demonstrate once again you can not be trusted to abide by Wikipedia's policies. --Yamla (talk) 21:35, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: the user who was doing this cross-wiki promotion was globally locked LilianGeorge1989, you can clearly see, and even the first time I have been blocked, I wasn't using my account for illegal purposes. Wikipedia's policies say that It's not Illegal to use another account but it's Illegal when using accounts for Illegal reasons, I didn't like vote two times with different accounts for the deletion of a page or something like that, I was just using this account for contributing only, see my history رايكر, I didn't use the account for illegal reasons. Kiro Bassem (talk) 21:47, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: please, Look at it once again and give me just one chance. I won't use an IP when I am unblocked or violate the policies again, I promise. I really love this place. Kiro Bassem (talk) 22:06, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You very clearly violated WP:SOCK by using both accounts to edit the same articles. Six months, zero edits. So far, you haven't been able to follow policy or keep your word. Zero edits, starting now. --Yamla (talk) 22:12, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know that using two accounts to edit the same articles is wrong, this is the first time I know it, I swear. Kiro Bassem (talk) 22:21, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ZERO EDITS. Not one. Zero. ZERO. --Yamla (talk) 22:23, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla: OK, I think I will just go on with it, I don't have another choice, but just one question, does those six months start from today or what? Kiro Bassem (talk) 22:25, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Starts from today. Because you are incapable of following direction, I will protect this page against any further edits for six months. Be warned, you will have a high bar to clear in six months, given your actions. --Yamla (talk) 22:29, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Yamla: I did it, I fulfilled my promise and I made zero edits since the last time you told me, not even with an IP and you can check that by yourself to make sure and I am saying the truth this time. Kiro Bassem (talk) 09:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be accurate. WP:UNBAN explains how to contest your ban. --Yamla (talk) 10:17, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]