User talk:Neutral Editor 645

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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.

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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.

Morbidthoughts (talk) 14:08, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Given that you have less than 500 edits, you should revert any edits that you have made about the Arab-Israeli conflict per WP:PIA. Morbidthoughts (talk) 16:48, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My edits were not concerning the conflict, but concerning a celebrity controversy. Do you have any specific disagreement with my edits? Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 16:57, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edits about her opinions about the conflict are still subject to WP:PIA. Even though I share your interpretation of her comments and controversy, it is still opinion and edits should adhere to a neutral point of view as reported by RS. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:13, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Morbidthoughts: They also started a discussion about the Israel-Hamas war. Are new editors strictly forbidden from participating in discussions about this topic? Jarble (talk) 21:26, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From what I understand, newer editors can still discuss the topic on the talk page as long as they are not disruptive. Morbidthoughts (talk) 19:39, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Talk:Owen Jones. Thank you. AusLondonder (talk) 12:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poorly referenced? I have not edited any article. Talk pages are for discussions, especially about contentious topics. I suggest that you respond there, if you disagree with the valid and well-documented points I have raised. References can be provided in the talk page discussion, if you are uninformed of the topic at hand. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 13:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong, please see WP:BLPTALK. "BLP applies to all material about living persons anywhere on Wikipedia, including talk pages, edit summaries, user pages, images, categories, lists, article titles and drafts." AusLondonder (talk) 13:26, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder

Per awareness notice above and WP:ARBECR, please confine your edits in the topic area to edit requests only. Thank you. Selfstudier (talk) 11:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just took a quick look at your contributions - this is in response to reverting my comment which provided an English language version of a Hebrew news article, for referencing the topic at hand.

While you are technically enforcing the rules, you are also being pedantic. The comment was brief and merely provided a link to a useful source for other editors, while not making any disruptive remarks or opinionated suggestions.

Since you feel strongly about this, I suggest that you provide the source URL there yourself, to avoid harming the discussion by removing the useful source. You can find it here. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 11:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Linking country names

Note that per MOS:OVERLINK there's no need to link commonly-recognised country names in articles, it's assumed that the reader would never actually want to click such a link. Belbury (talk) 08:45, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARBECR

You have to follow WP:ARBECR. Bitspectator ⛩️ 23:14, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]