User talk:Newsboy39

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! MPS1992 (talk) 21:40, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that very much. Newsboy39 (talk) 21:42, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

4 reverts within 2 days on Syrian civil war map

You made 4 reverts in 2 days on the Syrian civil war map.. That is twice two reverts within 24-hour. This including one revert you undid edits of 3 different users. You are well informed about the max 1 revert per 24 hours rule and the Syrian Civil War and ISIL general sanctions for it so please keep to this. Niele~enwiki (talk) 06:20, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Niele~enwiki I did it to inform other users to follow the rule of WP:SOCIALMEDIA. Many users keep using self-published Twiiter posts of individuals as sources even though they are not reliable. My intention to revert them was in good faith towards them and I did it to maintain the rules and accuracy of the map. I'm sorry if I crossed the limit. I don't ever intend to do it again, but it will help if a note was added in the module of the map saying not to use self-published Twitter posts. Newsboy39 (talk) 06:31, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're pushing you're personal stance that every twitter user is unreliable, while it is long accepted by the vast majority of users editing the map, that some twitter users can be proven reliable as a source according to the rules. 75% of all edits the last year where done on basis of reliable found/proven twitter users. But even than the source in this is 'Amaq News' wich is the official news outlet of Daesh. Not some random twitter user.

"Amaq news is used constantly under rule 'b': A well-known source that does not have a reputation for neutral (not biased) territorial control coverage, can be used (is deemed reliable) only for edits that are unfavorable to the side it prefers (favorable to the side it opposes).--Niele~enwiki (talk) 07:19, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can undo edits of different users, as long as you do it with one revert. However, you made more than one revert within 24-hours, with other users intervening, so you should reverse your most recent reversion. Note that informing other users to follow the rules is not an 1RR exemptions. Erlbaeko (talk) 09:02, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1RR Warning for Battle of Sirte

You should be made aware that all ISIL-related articles are under a general WP:1RR, which means, you can not make more than 1 revert in less than 24 hours. So, I ask you to please cancel your last edit and calmly discuss the issue at the talk page. Otherwise, I will have to report you at an administrator's noticeboard for breaking 1RR, this generally leads to a block. EkoGraf (talk) 10:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First, its not a threat, its an obligation per Wikipedia's policy that editor's need to be warned when breaking 1RR or 3RR. A hostile attitude like yours towards any fellow editor is not really helpful nor productive per WP:GOODFAITH or WP:CIVIL. Second, I am currently writing a reply to your message at the article's talk page and have been writing it for the last 20 minutes (so untrue that I am not willing to discuss). Third, I have discussed every issue that exist at every article or editor talk page that ever existed between me and any other fellow editor and we always found a compromise, so I really don't know where your extremely negative attitude towards me comes from (read Wikipedia:No personal attacks). EkoGraf (talk) 10:51, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please stop with your personal attacks on my talk page. If quoting WP policy and warning you of them are threats and a bossy attitude in your opinion than I cann't do anything about that. I see you have already been warned by another user of breaking 1RR (twice) at another ISIL-related article but you are unwilling to accept the 1RR policy. You should follow what both of us are advising you. EkoGraf (talk) 10:57, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My reply at the article's talk page is finished. EkoGraf (talk) 11:03, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Battle of Sirte (2016). Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. NgYShung ^huh? 11:20, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Najran

Hi could you create a page about the Battle of Najran ? Regards. Panam2014 (talk) 23:30, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I don't know how to. What batttle of Najran are you talking about? Is it about the revent conflicts between Houthis and Saudi Arabia? There's already a page for it. If it's a past battle then please ask someone else, I don't know how to create a page nor do I edit historical articles. Newsboy39 (talk) 04:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jarablus

Hey, thanks but I don't think the was made by me. :) --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 20:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really sorry. It was another user who had a similar name. Newsboy39 (talk) 20:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Sirte Image

The picture you removed from Battle of Sirte (2016) article has been a captured by a frined of mine who is fighting there and first posted in the offical Al-Bunyan Al-Marsos facebook page. I asked premison from him to use it and he agreed. Thanks :) --LibyaDragoon (talk) 12:32, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LibyaDragoon You've uploaded it under the wrong license. In the license you claimed that it was your own work. However you yourself admit it is of someone else. You cannot claim to be your work if it was taken by someone else. In the license you should have instead said that you obtained permission for using it from the author/photographer of the image. An image with the wrong license can be deleted by admins who check the copyright. I advice you to immediately correct the license. Once you do I'll put it back in the article. Newsboy39 (talk) 12:40, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Mosul offensive (2016)

On 26 August 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Mosul offensive (2016), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Jarabulus offensive (2016)

On 28 August 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jarabulus offensive (2016), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Step hen 23:38, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Inkscape lesson

Ok, the great moment has come, I'll now start to write about the most important things you need to know for editing Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) maps.--Ermanarich (talk) 14:47, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First, you need Inkscape. This program is free available in the internet.

To download the svg-file, you need to open it in the Media Viewer and klick on the download symbol in the right edge and download the original file (other wise you'll have a png version of it).

The difference between svg and normal picture files is, that svg has clearly defined objects, which stay the same if you zoom. And no matter how much you zoom in. Also, their quality isn't dexreasing after a couple of edits.

The first thing you should do when you open the program should be to click at the strip at the upper side on the lock, which is at the right of the Y,X and B values. This makes, that you can increase or decrease objects without losing their original shape.

The marks on the maps are quite easy to edit. You simply copy and paste (ctrl+c, ctrl+v) them at the places you want them to be.

To change the colour of an object, you have to choose the pipette at the left side and click on the object from which you want to have the colour.

The second part is a bit more difficult.

To change the extent of the areas under the marks, you need to choose thing under the mouse pointer at the left side you use normally, where you can see something comparable to a mouse pointer with a line that has points on it.

When you took it, you see knots at the edges of the marked object. You can take and move them to change the object. The knots have some kind of extensions. If you change the lenght of them, you get different curves between the knots. Also, there are two different types of "extensions" (sorry I have really no clue how to call them correctly). The one creates a smooth curve and makes the other extension move too, if you move the other one. The other one creates edges and has the two extensions independent from each other.

If you look at the same strip you found the lock before, there are now some other options. Here, you can change your knots from being edgy or smooth, etc.

One important thing I almost forgot: You can remove knots per clicking delete, and add new with holding your mouse pointer over the border of the object and make a double-klick.

Now you're almost through. A thing which is good to know remains: The objects are bedded over each other. If you want to have one object over/under another, you need to klick picture up/down at your keyboard. Pos1 makes your object the hightest of all, end the deepest.

And if you want to remove your latest edits, this can be done fastly per ctrl+z.

I think that's it for now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask. :)

(Little thing: text editing is another thing, but you shouldn't need that for now; when you need to know about it, ask again)

Regards, Ermanarich (talk) 15:59, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Conflict in the Niger Delta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Isoko. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Sirte (2016), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indians. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

September 2016

Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 13:00, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DatGuy I already know this but thanks anyway for informing again. I know you to have make sure everyone is given this template and informed. Newsboy39 (talk) 13:04, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Northern al-Bab offensive (2016), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dabiq. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Iraqi insurgency detailed map

What are you doing? I don't think I have ever seen anybody edit war with themselves. That is disruptive and can lead to blocking. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 09:25, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CambridgeBayWeather I'm sorry, but I wasn't trying to have an "edit war with myself". I was trying to solve an edit war with others. My first self-revert was done by mistake. Second one was as a goodwill gesture as I couldn't find any reliable source and decided to let go. However, I later did find a reliable source and thus self-reverted again. The latest two self-reverts were made because I wrongly named Jane's Information Group as Jane's International. I wanted to show everyone the correct name of this reliable source. These were the reasons behind my self-reverts. Newsboy39 (talk) 12:57, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK. That makes sense. Someone asked at WP:RFPP for protection and I was just following up. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 13:01, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Newsboy39. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]