User talk:Wikiwillkane

Speedy deletion nomination of Palestinian terrorism against Jews and Israel

Hello Wikiwillkane,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Palestinian terrorism against Jews and Israel for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, List of violent incidents in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, 2016.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Blythwood (talk) 05:57, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARBPIA3#500/30

Pr WP:ARBPIA3#500/30, all "accounts with fewer than 500 edits, and accounts with less than 30 days tenure are prohibited from editing any page that could be reasonably construed as being related to the Arab-Israeli conflict." Please edit in less controversial areas until you fulfil the requirement for editing in the Israel-Palestine area, thank you, Huldra (talk) 07:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That isnt something you should ignore. If you continue to edit in this topic area you may be reported and potentially blocked from editing. nableezy - 17:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Roseanne Barr

Hello. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person (Roseanne Barr), but that you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 21:41, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement

You have been reported for violating an arbitration decision. You can see this here. nableezy - 17:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARBPIA

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

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.

EdJohnston (talk) 13:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

Wikiwillkane, please do two things: 1) do not rewrite statements made on administrative noticeboards after any editor or admin has already responded to the original content and 2) always sign your remarks with four tildes (~~~~) so that people can easily see when you responded. You can always make a follow-up comment to update your response which you should also sign. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

HistoryWrite

Did you previously use this account Special:Contributions/HistoryWrite? Sean.hoyland - talk 18:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiwillkane, it would be helpful if you will answer this question one way or the other, for purposes of closing out the AE complaint. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:08, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Result of the complaint about your edits at WP:Arbitration enforcement

Please see this result. You are warned to observe the terms of the 500/30 general prohibition. If you make any more edits like those listed in the AE complaint. you may be made subject to a conventional topic ban from WP:ARBPIA across all pages of Wikipedia. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 23:46, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

Hello, I'm Intelligentsium. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Kim Kardashian, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. Also, it's generally considered poor practice to include a criticism/controversy section, especially for biographies. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Intelligentsium 23:50, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please stop re-adding the criticism section on Kim Kardashian without discussing it first on the talk page. Wikipedia discourages criticism sections as they tend to contain skewed, non-neutral coverage and violations of the biographies of living persons policy. Thanks. Intelligentsium 03:49, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Muslim destruction of Christian history for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Muslim destruction of Christian history 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/Muslim destruction of Christian history until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 05:25, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Kardashian

Hi, I've reverted your addition of the Controversies section as such sections are discouraged, it was poorly sourced, and tended to place undue weight on negative aspects of a biographical article. I've also started a thread on the talk page, where you're welcome to comment. However, please do not re-add the section as I will revert the addition per WP:BLP. Also note that making more than 3 reverts in a 24-hour period is considered edit warring and can lead to a block. Intelligentsium 14:54, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You need to ease of the editing of Kim K. To me, it appears that you either have some fascination or you are trying to game the ARBCOM decision of not allowing you to edit until you have 500 edits. That can also get you blocked as gaming the system. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 01:39, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not fascinated. Just took one of the most inane topics while building my required 500 edits. (Not trying to game the system.) K. Kardashian built her career and fortune on controversy... why is this not allowed to be added to her page?Wikiwillkane (talk) 01:56, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is the over abundance of your edits. It is undue for the article. One or two might suffice but a ton of these is overkill. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 01:57, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thanks. I have three questions: 1) Am I allowed to delete these edits that have been placed on MY Talk page? 2) How do I find the email to email a user? I cannot find it under tools. 3) Can you recommend a place to edit while building my 500? Maybe pages that need work? Thanks.

1) You can delete almost anything on your own talk page, and everything on it now would be OK to delete, but the history is there so it's up to you if you want to delete it.(Also, deleting a notice is an admission that you read it.) 2) Most users don't post their emails, but if you are using FireFox (maybe IE/Chrome) and hover over a username there should be an option to email an user, but you can also just leave a message on someone's talk page and most people would get notified. 3) If you want, you can check out Recent Changes on the left, and from there you can also check vandalism patrol. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 02:09, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPOV

Please stop making biased edits. You are accusing other editors of bias if they try to tell you. Consider everyone's opinion, don't just assume you're right. You are not allowed to vote more than once, which you did. A good rule of thumb is to only make 3 comments (not votes) per relist unless you are notifying the editors of something, like a sockpuppet that voted. Wikipedia is neutral, which means to judge each religion equally. I did not say only atheists are non-biased, I meant that I was personally not biased. You clearly have a strong opinion on this, which is why it is normally a good idea to not edit articles that you have a strong opinion on. Keep your opinion to yourself, and be WP:HERE. Please stop this disruptive behavior. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 23:33, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Wikiwillkane, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Kim Kardashian has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 01:50, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I have replied on my talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:20, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

To enforce an arbitration decision and for evading an AE block on a previous account, you have been blocked indefinitely from editing. Your ability to edit this talk page has also been revoked. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) then contact the Arbitration Committee through Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee (or, if your email access is revoked, to arbcom-l

lists.wikimedia.org). You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 19:19, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "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."