User talk:Yitbe/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

Concern regarding Draft:Wolaita before 1800s

Hello, Yitbe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Wolaita before 1800s, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:02, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Conflict of interest policy

Hello, Yitbe. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. --Hipal (talk) 16:39, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Dear Hipal, in short, I say to you that I HAVE NO COI. I know this person via the books, magazines, journals, YouTube and other interviews in TV. That's all. - Yitbe ^A-21 21:14, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. --Hipal (talk) 21:36, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome. - Yitbe ^A-21 06:27, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

A belated welcome

Hi Yitbe. Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily in collaboration.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter. Regardless, editing in a manner that promotes an entity or viewpoint over others can appear to be detrimental to the purpose of Wikipedia and the neutrality required in articles.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

If you work from reliable, independent sources, you shouldn't go far wrong. WP:RSP and WP:RSN are helpful in determining if a source is reliable.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Hipal (talk) 21:36, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Please do not use unreliable sources

Hi Yitbe. Regarding your comment [1] It's better to put a "better source needed" tag where you doubt the source is unreliable. Action like this is most similar with vandalism. Is there something unclear in what I wrote above? We simply do not use unreliable sources in Wikipedia. Accusing someone of vandalism in this context makes it appear you are unable to work collaboratively with others and follow our policies. --Hipal (talk) 15:52, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --Hipal (talk) 15:53, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

There is no way to block me from editing. I'm doing what's right. If you believe the sources are unreliable, you can start a discussion under the article's talk page or leave a tag better source needed in a place where you believe it be rather doing things most similar with vandalism. Yitbe ^A-21 16:07, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I ran across the same problem - the sourcing is absolutely unacceptable. A self-published pamphlet? A scraper/gossip site? A slide show? Please stop. Kuru (talk) 23:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Why the sources are "absolutely unacceptable". All of you blindly opposing the sources. Be rational and open minded whoever you're. - Yitbe ^A-21 22:07, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

I wrote above, WP:RSP and WP:RSN are helpful in determining if a source is reliable.

Please revert your edit, then join the discussion on the article talk page. --Hipal (talk) 01:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Echoing this. There is now a detailed discussion on the article's talk page, in addition to several notes in the edit summaries. Since most of the sources seem to be clearly unacceptable, now would be a good time to clear up your confusion. Kuru (talk) 01:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy notice - ANEW

Your editing is being discussed at WP:ANEW. Please consider joining the discussion. --Hipal (talk) 15:25, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Bezabih Peteros

Hello, Yitbe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bezabih Peteros, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:01, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021

Hi Yitbe! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Kitaw Ejigu that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 08:57, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. - Yitbe ^A-21 17:20, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

AfroCine: 2020 Months of African Cinema Contest Winners

Greetings!

Thank you very much for participating in The 2020 Months of African Cinema Global Contest which was concluded on 30 November 2020. The contest was able exceed all expectations, with the creation of over 3,200 articles written in 19 languages. This places the contest firmly as one of the most successful article writing contest on Wikipedia.

A big thank you to you and every single person who created articles during the period of the contest for making this happen!

Please note that we have now concluded the review of all submitted articles, and winners have now been listed on the relevant page. We'd still be contacting everyone who has won something separately to send over their prizes. Thank you very much once again! --Jamie Tubers (talk) 23:45, 03 April 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Transitional Government of Tigray

Hello, Yitbe. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Transitional Government of Tigray, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:02, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

April 2021

You recently removed on ongoing topic that not resolved from my talk page replaced to old conversation as shown here[2]. you can not remove ongoing discusion without reach Wikipedia:Consensus. let me tell you this although archiving talk pages is preferred , Wikipedia policy does not prevent ANY USERS from removing contents from talk pages to blank. if you want to know the history, you can go through page history. However I haven't removed any that wikipedia restricted to such as unblock requests, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion, and Speedy deletion. I don't Understand why you removed ongoing discussion and replaced with old one. I advice you to read WP:BLANKING for the policy on blanking user talk pages. MfactDr (talk) 02:18, 21 April 2021 (UTC) .