User talk:Wahakadha mustakhdim

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom, as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page—my talk page—as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

Welcome![edit]

Hi Wahakadha mustakhdim! I noticed your contributions to Kartal and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Kleuske (talk) 20:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation[edit]

Hi, thank you for adding transcriptions. However, please note that {{IPAc-en}} is, as the name implies, exclusively for notating how English speakers pronounce words, and cannot be used for suggesting an approximate pronunciation using the phonology of English (which inevitably lacks some sounds or phonotactics any other language has). If you want to add how Turkish speakers pronounce Turkish words, please use {{IPA|tr|...}} complying with the conventions laid out in the Help:IPA/Turkish key. If you want to add how English speakers pronounce the name of a place in Turkey, please cite a reliable source that verifies they in fact do—failing to do so would be a violation of the No original research policy. Thanks! Nardog (talk) 14:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the page Barcelona has English pronunciation without a source given? Before stopping me, please try to remove the English pronunciation from there, get reverted, go discuss it, and establish a consensus about removing the Enlish pronunciation from the articles of non-English speaking places. Wahakadha mustakhdim (talk) 13:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That there exists unsourced content is not an excuse to add more. Barcelona is an internationally well-known city and it's trivially easy to find multiple sources that back up the transcription, whereas /ɡjumuʃɑːˈnɛ/ violates the phonotactics of English so it's not even remotely plausible that English speakers pronounce Gümüşhane as such. Nardog (talk) 15:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Please do not continue to bug me about the Israel-Palestine conflict. It is against the rules to proxy for an editor with less than 500 edits. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, you're trying not to outspeak that you fully support Israel's actions. I'm not making potentially controversial edits on contentious pages at the moment, if that's your concern. Completely out of topic, if someone (guess who) with above 500 edits is disturbed by women and children being murdered, he himself would denounce it via editing the contentious pages to make them mention the neutral, proven facts about the atrocities, when people with below 500 could not. Just saying. Wahakadha mustakhdim (talk) 10:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024[edit]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Crow, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Dan Bloch (talk) 19:23, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you finished ditching through my contribs finding "mistakes" to correct. Wahakadha mustakhdim (talk) 19:27, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, turns out you didn't. Go on, revert every change I made :) Wahakadha mustakhdim (talk) 19:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Envelope. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
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. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. This edit created a grammar error. Julietdeltalima (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, didn't knew that not being a native English speaker is a warnable offense. Wahakadha mustakhdim (talk) 16:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make grammar copyedits that you are not sure are correct. I do not understand how this minor request is questionable or inappropriate. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 16:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll try my best on that one. Wahakadha mustakhdim (talk) 16:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've revoked ECP[edit]

You need 500 normal edits. You were clearly gaming the system. So once again, you cannot edit articles in the conflict area until another Administrator restores it. Doug Weller talk 17:46, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. You've revoked my ECP not because my edits are not "normal", but because I'm pro-Palestine, that is, pro-Humanity. I know that neither you nor another admin wouldn't restore my ECP, even if I made 5000 "normal" edits. Because your definition of normalcy is likely just Zionism. Wahakadha mustakhdim (talk) 18:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wahakadha mustakhdim you could not be more wrong about what I think. And I expect a lot of your redirects will need reveriting. Doug Weller talk 19:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This, and so many other unlikely redirects you have created, are not "normal" edits. Bishonen | tålk 19:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

I modeled that after the redirect Jew by birth. If singular is okay, why not the plural? Wahakadha mustakhdim (talk) 19:26, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for personal attacks[edit]

I have blocked you for 48 hours for your attacks against Doug Weller just above. Please read Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Assume good faith. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | tålk 19:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

So you think that calling somebody Zionist is assuming "bad faith"? Because I did not said that. It's your take. Wahakadha mustakhdim (talk) 19:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Spicy (talk) 21:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wahakadha mustakhdim (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Block me, that I don't care. What frustrates me is that you guys aren't honest about why you're blocking me. Just be the men of bravery, and openly say that you're blocking me for being pro-Palestine and defending promoting the right of Palestinian civils to live with dignity. From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is His servant and the messenger. If being pro-Palestine is banned here, ban me too. If it is not, unblock me. Wahakadha mustakhdim (talk) 21:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Confirmed sockpuppetry. Yamla (talk) 21:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.