User talk:Kebabpizza

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * Welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style


 * Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring or sock puppetry.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
 * Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!

Notice
Hello Kebabpizza. Your account has been [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3A granted] the "rollbacker" and "pending changes reviewer" user rights. These user rights allow you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes and quickly revert the edits of other users.


 * Rollback user right
 * Please keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin).


 * Pending changes reviewer user right
 * The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection enabled is located at Special:StablePages. You may find the following pages useful to review:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing.
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes.
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of reviewer or rollback. If you no longer want either of these user rights, contact me and I'll remove it, alternatively you can leave a request on the administrators' noticeboard. Happy editing! S warm  ♠  04:17, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Comment by User:83.128.175.68
I attempted to make it more neutral by adding a source that favored the orthodox side next to the many liberal ones. On an issue of Catholicism, Catholic sources should have their place.83.128.175.68 (talk) 20:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for voicing your issue. With your edit, you removed several independent, reliable sources and replaced it with a single source to back up your claim. Wikipedia articles should adhere to a neutral point of view and Catholic sources are therefore not to be regarded as the best sources on Catholic issues. Kebabpizza (talk) 20:18, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

The sources are rather anti-papal and hence not neutral. Islamic articles, or Coptic articles don`t get the same treatment. They rely mainly on their sources and not that of their enemies. 83.128.175.68 (talk) 20:22, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * If you're using terms like "anti-papal" then I would have serious concerns about your objectivity on this issue. Contaldo80 (talk) 07:25, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

CSD
Please be careful with your speedy deletion nominations. For example, you tagged How do satelites help humans as G1 (patent nonsense) when it was clearly understandable. G12 was more applicable because the article was a copyvio of. Was this just a typo? Altamel (talk) 21:38, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I have replied on your talk page :) Kebabpizza (talk) 11:42, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. I'm afraid I disagree: that article was never eligible for G1 speedy deletion. It was poorly formatted, and the lack of paragraph breaks meant it was difficult to understand, but "patent nonsense" only refers to text that is so convoluted that despite any effort, it is impossible to understand. The speedy deletion criteria should be applied very strictly: it might be helpful to read Field guide to proper speedy deletion and review examples of what is and what is not patent nonsense. But thank you for your work patrolling vandalism and new pages. The encyclopedia definitely needs more help in those areas; it is important that patrollers discourage only the vandals, and not any good-faith newcomers. Altamel (talk) 14:36, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Attack page
Hi. I received a speedy deletion notification from you that doubles as a pretty stern warning for creating an attack page, which I don't believe I deserved. The page in question is User talk:Doctor Quax. It's important to take a look at the page history before tagging a page as WP:G10. In this case, I created this user's talk page six months ago when I, coincidentally, notified them that I'd tagged a page of theirs for speedy deletion. The user has since been indefinitely blocked, but still had access to edit their talk page for the purpose of making unblock requests. The inappropriate content was inserted today by that user over the top of the talk page content.

In the event of a page that previously contained appropriate content, but which was vandalized to contain attack content, G10 is not appropriate. The page should be reverted to the "clean" version and, if the attack is bad enough, you can contact an admin to request revision deletion of only the inappropriate revisions of the page.

In this case, the page has already been reverted rather than deleted, and the user's block was modified to prevent them from editing their talk page in future. Cheers, Nick⁠—⁠Contact/Contribs 00:16, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your feedback, I looked at the user's contributions and I was aware that he had been blocked, I therefore saw no encyclopedic value in keeping a talk page with such content, as the user will never edit Wikipedia again. I apologise for the warning that was (automatically) sent to you. Kebabpizza (talk) 09:18, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

March 2019
Hello, I'm Mattythewhite. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Bobby Madley, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:24, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Derek Chauvin
I think it's quite clear that there should not be an article on Derek Chauvin. Did you read the deletion discussion at Articles for deletion/Derek Chauvin (police officer)? StAnselm (talk) 23:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Were you aware that racists were selling products, like t-shirts with a shot cut from the 8:46 video? How do you think this development should be covered?  Geo Swan (talk) 22:46, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52978193
 * 2) https://www.foxnews.com/lifestyle/amazon-investigating-derek-chauvin-george-floyd-shirts
 * 3) https://sourcingjournal.com/topics/business-news/amazon-george-floyd-t-shirt-i-cant-breathe-blm-215351/
 * 4) https://www.insider.com/amazon-shirt-george-floyd-death-on-similar-product-removed-2020-6
 * Uh..... Ok? Kebabpizza (talk) 22:51, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Media link edit
Can you explain why you did this? I've never seen anyone make an edit like that. Please use ping if you respond here. Thanks. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:11, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Derek Chauvin mugshot.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Derek Chauvin mugshot.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Tutelary (talk) 03:50, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Derek Chauvin mugshot.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Derek Chauvin mugshot.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Ə XPLICIT 00:03, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

March 2022
Hello, I'm Firestar464. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Firestar464 (talk) 11:41, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

"King Charles" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect King Charles and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 8 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2022 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)