User talk:Lifeisgood12345

March 2024

Hello, I'm ThaddeusSholto. I noticed that you recently removed content from Sa'sa' Massacre without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 13:52, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi, I'm new to editing. so I'm still figuring things out. However I am trying to get rid of one source here as it is from a discredited historian. how do I go about that. Thanks for your comment. Lifeisgood12345 (talk) 13:55, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blanking sources from multiple authors, not just one. You are clearly here with an agenda and your edits come close to violating WP:ARBECR. Article pages are for discussion of the articles. Blanking is vandalism. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 13:56, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no agenda. I thought it was one author? Can you maybe explain the rules to me so I understand better, not sure what you mean by blanking Lifeisgood12345 (talk) 13:58, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit deals with Norman Finkelstein and this edit and this comment with Ilan Pappé. Two different authors. Blanking is the removal of content without reason or discussion. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 14:00, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok well my point with getting rid of them is that its false information from sketchy sources, how do I get rid of it the right way? Lifeisgood12345 (talk) 14:58, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't. Finkelstein is a reliable source as is Pappé. These have been discussed in the proper venue, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 15:10, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok now I clearly see how elitist and hostile this platform is. You are a group of a few dozen people who think you have a monopoly on truth and will gladly spread misleading or flat out lies to serve a point. This is why nobody wants to edit here anymore and people believe that nothing is reliable on Wikipedia. For just one example of hundreds that I have seen and documented in the last year, on Musa Alami's Wikipedia entry it says that he was viewed by many as the leader of the Palestinian Arabs in the 1940s. It claims that using a source that I went and checked. The sources does not say that at all. This is a constant problem on Wikipedia, I try to change the is one thing to what it actually says, and it gets changed back. Whatever its not worth talking to you about this. Good day. Lifeisgood12345 (talk) 15:20, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

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.

Even though this standard template says "it does not imply that there are any issues with your editing", in fact your repeated rudeness is a violation of one of our key policies. Keep it up and you will be blocked quite soon. Likewise if you don't heed the above instructions about 500 edits. Zero^talk 07:11, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]