User talk:Yezohtz2

cool

Welcome!

Hello, Yezohtz2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! 220 of ^Borg 10:38, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014

A few links for you

Hello Yezohtz2, in view of this edit please read:

Wikipedia:Assume good faith
Wikipedia:Civility ('Pillar 4') and
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view ('Pillar 2')

Your comment here didn't assume good faith, was uncivil to the editor and suggested that you possibly lack a neutral point of view.
Please check out the links and familiarise yourself with Wikipedia (WP) guidelines. Regards, --220 of ^Borg 11:01, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2014 Sydney hostage crisis. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Discuss on talk page Luxure Σ 11:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at 2014 Sydney hostage crisis. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. Luxure Σ 12:04, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't threathen me. I am reporting you for edit warring

Yezohtz2 (talk) 11:52, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are not being threatened, that is a standard wikipedia warning. As you are the editor seeking to make a change, you are clearly in breach of the three revert rule for which you can be blocked. Stop edit warring, go to the talk page and seek consensus for what you want to include; if you don't get consensus let it go. That's how wikipedia works. Melcous (talk) 11:58, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See, now you are all ganging up on me. Please be professional.

Why are you even on my talk page? How did you get here? This does NOT concern you.

Yezohtz2 (talk) 12:00, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure @Melcous: came here to give you a warning as well. These reports that you keep adding are UNCONFIRMED by law agencies in Australia. Luxure Σ 12:03, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did come here to warn you that you are in violation of the 3RR rule, as you have been reverting some of my edits on the same article (including one fixing a typo - I have no idea why). It seems you do not understand how it works. As you are the editor seeking to change the article, the onus is on you to gain consensus on the talk page for your changes, not the other way around. If you do not stop reverting, I will report you and as you have now made over 9 reversions without engaging on the talk page, you will likely be blocked. So before it gets to that, please try to understand how the 3RR works. Melcous (talk) 12:09, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/dec/16/hostages-in-the-sydney-siege-were-not-getting-out-of-here

"He drew a short-barrelled shotgun, and bellowed at customers to stand with their hands up. He screamed at them that he was a representative of Islamic State and that this was a terrorist attack. He told them there were bombs in the building, and that they must do as he instructed."

"In exchange for a public declaration from the government that his was an act of terror committed on behalf of Islamic State, he was prepared to release two more."

Austrilian authorities would not be an objective source given that they do want to give into the attacker's demands. His motives quoted above by The Guardian are from the hostages he captured and are now stating this on record.

Yezohtz2 (talk) 12:08, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And yet the attacker is dead and they still have not confirmed it as a terror attack? He had no links to IS (as far as we know). It's like writing an article of a cyclone hitting the coast before it actually hits the coast. It remains unconfirmed. You may be blocked soon if you do not discuss it appropriately. Luxure Σ 12:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you Muslim yourself? When an objective source is presented, you update the article accordingly. You don't ask open assed questions like "Well, if he's dead, then why is the Australian relectant to say this and that".

Yezohtz2 (talk) 12:17, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whether I am Muslim, Christian, Jew, Buddhist or of no faith is not any of your business. You are hostile and do not engage in GF editing. Luxure Σ 12:21, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is my business. I need to know if you are a Jihadi and whether you have WP:CONFLICT in editing the article. As I said, you have been reported for WP:EDITWARRING. It is not in my hands not whether you will be banned if you continue reverting.

Yezohtz2 (talk) 12:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is interesting. Tell me how that goes for you. :) Luxure Σ 12:36, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Yezohtz2 reported by User:Luxure (Result: ). Thank you. Luxure Σ 12:25, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at 2014 Sydney hostage crisis. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:20, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yezohtz2, in this comment you refer to Luxure2 as a jihadi. This might be viewed as a personal attack, so I suggest you remove that term. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:40, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

EdJohnston (talk) Yes, I just chatted with a few people in the IRC chat and they pointed out it's not appropriate. I have amended the comment. Apologies, that was clearly not in the spirit Wikipedia. Yezohtz2 (talk) 16:45, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: and it wasn't the first time