Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 98Tigerius was:

This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mohammad Hyasat and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 ^{[𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺]} 01:53, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@98Tigerius: Can you explain what is meant by insufficient context, and what can be added? Makeandtoss (talk) 11:36, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@98Tigerius:? Makeandtoss (talk) 09:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings and felicitations. While making my own changes to "October 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel" I noticed that you added the named reference "cnn111", but that there is no such reference. I thought you'd like to know so that you can fix it. —DocWatson42 (talk) 13:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DocWatson42: Fixed, thanks. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. ^_^ —DocWatson42 (talk) 15:51, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An uninvolved administrator has suggested possible sanctions for your participation on the 1948 Arab–Israeli War article at the Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard. The thread is Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Nableezy. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Makeandtoss. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Grand Husseini Mosque, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 13:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Makeandtoss. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:King Faisal Square, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Arbitration enforcement referral: Nableezy, et al and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Barkeep49: Sorry, can you please explain how there was a consensus for ARCA in either thread, and how I was involved in this ARCA consensus? Makeandtoss (talk) 20:06, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see consensus among myself, Valereee, ScottishFinnishRadish, and Ealdgyth that AE is going to be unable to fully address the second Nableezy thread. I explained at ARCA why I interpreted that as also applying to the first thread and my reply to IO explains how you're involved. Barkeep49 (talk) 20:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Barkeep49: Thanks for the elaboration. Can you please refer to how does Ealdgyth mention this? Also, SFR seems to mention this thread meaning the second, while Valereee was referring to SAILOING which relates to the second thread. As for the reply to IO, one admin's sanctions proposal, which did not seem to gain support, is not equivalent in my view to a rough consensus for ARCA referral. Makeandtoss (talk) 20:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right that I slightly misread what Ealdgyth wrote and so while I expect they would be in favor they didn't actually express it in that thread. I diffed two admin who were supportive of a broad 0RR. I personally agree it did not get traction but neither was there a consensus abotu what to do in its place - there was a consensus among the uninvolved admin that edit warring had occurred. Barkeep49 (talk) 21:06, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Barkeep49: I appreciate that. You are certainly much more experienced here than I am, both as an editor and an admin; it seems me an alternative course of action would have been to reignite the discussion that had died out to see where admin opinions have converged at AE, similar to the kind of interventions that SFR does there. From my point of view, the single revert that I made while being communicative, being escalated to a lengthy and time-consuming ARCA review, seems like an very steep and inadvertent escalation. Makeandtoss (talk) 21:15, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd encourage you to engage on the substance of your actions at WP:ARCA as it's currently up to ArbCom whether or not to take any action. Barkeep49 (talk) 21:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Barkeep49: I would gladly do so but the basis of the referral does not seem to have been a consensus for that, especially for the first thread and the editors involved. If you don't mind me pinging @Ealdgyth: @ScottishFinnishRadish: @Valereee: for their kind input. Makeandtoss (talk) 21:23, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Seraphimblade has also expressed support at ARCA for the referral so I'm pinging them. Barkeep49 (talk) 21:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So far as my thoughts on it, I was actually in the midst of reviewing the first thread, and doing a deeper dive into the second, when Barkeep49 made the referral, so I hadn't commented further yet (I may if a case is accepted and there's an evidence phase; I did keep track of several things I found in doing so). But one thing doing so made abundantly clear is that it's the type of tangled mess it would be difficult if not impossible to meaningfully resolve at AE, and a more deliberative process, like ArbCom, will almost certainly be superior to any bandaid solution AE could try to apply. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:37, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What I was seeing was uninvolved admins expressing concern AE couldn't deal with this stuff and implicitly or explicitly arguing it might need arbcom. Valereee (talk) 21:37, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can also chalk me up as supporting a referral. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:08, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have an issue with supporting a referral. I had plans to review things this evening since my week has been insanely busy, and would likely have weighed in suggesting a referral this evening ... Ealdgyth (talk) 22:42, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then, I will be commenting there shortly. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Butterscotch Beluga. Thank you. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 23:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not accusing you, but you're mentioned. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 23:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chess: Well, using the passive voice could have saved you the hassle of notifying me. Makeandtoss (talk) 08:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Flamewar at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions over BilledMammal. Thank you. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 19:05, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry being eager, but would be nice if you could respond to me comment here.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 23:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

Motion 1: Appeals only to ArbCom

Motion 2b: Word limits

Motion 2c: Word limits

Motion 5: PIA5 Case

Addendum

In passing motion #5 to open a Palestine-Israel articles 5 case, the Committee has appointed three drafters: Aoidh, HJ Mitchell, and CaptainEek. The drafters have resolved that the case will open on November 30. The delay will allow the Committee time to resolve a related private matter, and allow for both outgoing and incoming Arbitrators to vote on the case. The drafters have changed the party list to the following individuals:

• BilledMammal (talk · contribs)
• Iskandar323 (talk · contribs)
• Ïvana (talk · contribs)
• Levivich (talk · contribs)
• Nableezy (talk · contribs)
• Selfstudier (talk · contribs)
• האופה (talk · contribs)
• AndreJustAndre (talk · contribs)
• IOHANNVSVERVS (talk · contribs)
• Alaexis (talk · contribs)
• Zero0000 (talk · contribs)
• Makeandtoss (talk · contribs)
• Snowstormfigorion (talk · contribs)

The drafters reserve the right to amend the list of parties if necessary. The drafters anticipate that the case will include a two week evidence phase, a one week workshop phase, and a two week proposed decision phase.

The related Arbitration enforcement referral: Nableezy et al request has been folded into this case. Evidence from the related private matter, as alluded to in the Covert canvassing and proxying in the Israel-Arab conflict topic area case request, will be examined prior to the start of the case, and resolved separately.

For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 05:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Arbitration motions regarding Palestine-Israel articles

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is to inform you that your technical request for a move of the Rashid Ṭaliʽa article has been contested. You can still request the move by following the "Controversial moves" procedure - see WP:PCM. Thanks. Tevildo (talk) 14:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 23:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC), which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 05:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § RfC: Times of Israel. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 20:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Palestine-Israel articles 5. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is The interaction of named parties in the WP:PIA topic area and examination of the WP:AE process that led to two referrals to WP:ARCA. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made:

First, the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days, until 23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC). Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on the evidence talk page, providing a reason with WP:DIFFS as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective.

Second, the evidence phase has been extended by a week, and will now close at 23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC). For the Arbitration Committee, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Golan_Heights&diff=prev&oldid=1261573062 You seem to, again, have distorted information based on the need for Lead brevity. This edit makes it sound like Israel have controlled 2/3 or the Golan heights since 1967. You have done the same in these edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israel&diff=prev&oldid=1263209557 , https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israel&diff=prev&oldid=1263209396 , https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israel&diff=prev&oldid=1250163530 , https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=October_2024_Iranian_strikes_against_Israel&diff=prev&oldid=1250430982 , https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hamas&diff=prev&oldid=1251828828 , and possibly more. These edits all have one thing in common, they remove key information from a lead in an Article relating to Israel. I find it hard to imagine this as a coincidence. None of them are reasonably justified or involved any discussion. 𝙏𝙚𝙧𝙧𝙖𝙞𝙣𝙢𝙖𝙣地形人 (talk) 14:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I came here after seeing your edit summary on Golan Heights, which seemed a bit out of the blue. Having now seen the diffs, the majority of these edits all seem perfectly fine and defensible. I'd agree with most of them on the basis of being concise alone. Your 2/3 comment is strange, since surely it's more favourable to Israel to say it occupied less of a given territory for that whole time than to say they occupied all of it but gave some back a while later? I don't object to your edit, but I'm not sure it's evidence of bias, at any rate.

Sorry for butting in, but this seems like a misunderstanding? Lewisguile (talk) 19:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Terrainman, what you find hard to imagine is your problem, not Wikipedia's, and not something you need to be bothering other editors about. If you disagree with an edit, you know what to do, open a discussion on the talk page of the article. Also, read WP:VANDAL and only use the word vandalism to describe vandalism. Sean.hoyland (talk) 02:05, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]