User talk:KnownAs-79-181-9-231

Welcome!

 * }

Recent edits re Golan Heights
Hi, Thank you for editing wikipedia :) While being WP:BOLD is generally encouraged throughout wikipedia, there are some articles that are deemed controversial and subject to much discussion. For these articles it is best to present proposed edits for wider discussion before they are incorporated into the article. I believe that a good part of the edit that you made can indeed achieve consensus, but I also fear that some parts would fall afoul of policies such as WP:UNDUE. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me on my talkpage or direct comments about the article content on the talkpage for that article. Best Regards, Unomi (talk) 22:15, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Please discuss your proposed changes at Talk:Golan Heights. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 22:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose, at their own discretion, sanctions on any editor working on pages broadly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict if the editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. If you continue with the behavior on Golan Heights, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban. The committee's full decision can be read at Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles. Due to the subject matter edits made to this article should be discussed on the talk page. Please do not make substantive edits or reversions without discussing it on the article's talk page. Feel free to contact me if you need additional assistance or help. --WGFinley (talk) 01:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

3 editors found fault with your proposed edit and addressed your arguments on the talk page, the correct response is to engage in that discussion. un☯mi 05:05, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Blocked - 24 Hours
You have been blocked for violating the 1RR rule in place on Golan Heights. You put this information in it was reverted, you then put it back in again. This is in violation of the 1RR in force on the article to reduce the edit warring. In accordance with discretionary sanctions for Palestine-Isreal Conflict articles I have blocked you for 24 hours. Appeal of this block must be made on the Aribtration Enforcement board or to me. --WGFinley (talk) 23:36, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Broken link
Hey 79. I like the sandbox approach, however the link you have published is broken. It says something about deletion of duplicate article. I think it is a good idea to look into WP:NPOV generally and WP:NPOVN procedure specifically. The question now is how to translate the diff into short and neutral request, reflecting all sides points. Generally sourcing requirement is directed by guidelines, i.e. it is just a recommendation to follow. Unlike article in question, some articles sourcing is pretty awful. Neutrality is more important than sourcing, in wiki context. Being tertiary source, Wikipedia does not have to mimic secondary and primary wording, just to reflect factual neutral state. Finally neutrality is a Wikipedia policy. Noticeboard review defines what is wiki-neutral or not. The result is almost a wiki-law. It is a good idea to look at archives to see how this procedure ticks and on some existing precedents. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 18:18, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Blocked as a sock puppet
You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. (blocked by –MuZemike 00:12, 27 August 2010 (UTC))

You may contest this block by adding the text below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.

SPI
Was there an SPI about this? It seems to have been deleted really quick. --Shuki (talk) 11:44, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes. --WGFinley (talk) 14:27, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * tnx. --Shuki (talk) 15:10, 27 August 2010 (UTC)