User talk:Tnafeh

Greetings. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Tiran Island, did not appear to be constructive and has been or will be reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, 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 some test edits, please use the 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. JamesG5 (talk) 06:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Tiran Island. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted or removed. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. JamesG5 (talk) 06:33, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * 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.

April 2016
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:45, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Jim

I don't know who or what you think you are doing by denying my edit of this article to reflect fact in a country I live in!

do you have knowledge of the topic?

if so you are delibertatly falsifying history, and whitewashing major events and willfully describing half or incomplete truths for whatever agenda you might be standing for... Will I am goinf to ask you to cease and desist or remvoing my edits or simply will consider Wikipedia culpable in history revisionism and willful attempts at spreading falsehoods!

You either keep the edit that describe current status and circumstances of this island, or I am going to ask Wikipedia to remove the article pagr altogether, for it's fa;iure to speak the truth and spreading flasehoods abouthe fate of the Island and what it represnests to national interest of EGyptian people....
 * Having "knowledge of" something, especially in regards to current events, does not meet Wikipedia standards for inclusion. Information must have reliable sources and since Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS sometimes that means current events aren't immediately addressed, in large part so the dust can settle and the facts are apparent.  Even then Wikipedia strives to maintain a neutral point of view.  You've been posting comments that strongly sway to certain viewpoints, and for which you show no sources.  You have links on this page in the comments we've left to Wikipedia policies on these issues.  If you feel a change needs to be made, start a discussion on the article's talk page and get some consensus before making changes.  Neither  nor  nor myself are from the area, we don't have any agenda other than Wikipedia best practices.  Asking for the article's removal won't happen, and won't address the issue.  Working it out on the talk page with reliable sources will. JamesG5 (talk) 08:10, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

James so does professing your "ignorance" of the topic and region "area as you called it" and citing your "terms of use" that propogates falshoods help??

Help me get this one striaght, if nither anyone of you Jim nor Oshwa has any info on the topic, who the hell elected your to censor knowledge and engage in history revisionism?!!!

Unless you are saying Wikipedia propgates rubish, then your explanation is just that Rubbish!!

Here are the sources for my amendments from far more reputable & professional media and knowledge outlets than your willfully ignorant outfit will ever be..

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/13/world/middleeast/leaks-gain-credibility-and-potential-to-embarrass-egypts-leaders.html?_r=0\ Referrence of Sissy Coup Government mockery and lamenting the wealth of Saudis (his sole benefavtors propping up his Coup)

And here is an HISTORIC source, indicating the islands (same color as the territory of Egypt pre First world war) by an Italian merchant firm, pre world war I at the end of the 19th century, this very map was LOANED by the American Geographical Society to the Paris Peace confernce post First World war, that was convened to draw up post war peace treaties.. THE POINT BEING MADE IN THIS SOURCE FOR MY ARGUMENT THAT THOSE ISLAND WERE EGYPTIANS PRIOR TO THE CREATION OF THE SAUDI ARABIAN KINGDOM Circa 1932...

https://www.wdl.org/en/item/15040/view/1/1/

Here is a source reference of the illegitimate Egyptian Coup parliament status, that is expected to rubber stamp the Military Coup regime's concession of those Islands to the Saudis

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/01/egypt-hollow-parliament-160112071640089.html

And here James find a source of the Legitimate democratically elected Parliament of Egypt that would have turned down and nullified as inconstitutional the concession of the Coup authority of the islands to the Saudis

http://abcnews.go.com/International/egyptian-coup-dissolves-parliament/story?id=16569673 NOW James after this crash course of FACTS about the topic which the disputed article at hand deals with, if you and your outfit Wikipedia have a shred of professionalism and or decency, you would allow my amendment to stand, and or remove the history revisionism piece posted about the islands you are trying to pass as fait accompli..

Rest assured I will keep my efforts on various social media outlet to expose your contribution to travesty of history and politics and your pernicious slight to the deomcratic struggle of the people of Egypt....

TNAEH

Ok. So create a section called "controversy over ownership of island" and use those historical links to make the case, but be aware that you can't use language like "Sissy Coup Government." See WP:POV. Stick to the facts in a dispassionate manner, and only what you can back up. The claims of whether or not a government is legitimate, for instance doesn't belong here. Source your stuff, stick to a neutral tone, and it's all good. JamesG5 (talk) 00:55, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring notice
Your recent editing history at Tiran Island shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jim1138 (talk) 07:36, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  10:16, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

You are Full of shit wikishit and "fortuna"!.... your editor james was furnished with all facts about an erroneous and misleading article you have about the topic "Tiran island", sources of hsitoric and recent political events was furnished in support of my amendments, yet you chose to wilfully be ignorant & a misleading source of knowledge, propogating falsehoods and distorting political realities for an entire nation. Already your sad reputation of distorting historical facts and well established geopolitical realities, for the hidden political agenda and vile goals of some of your "approved" editors, is making serious splashing headlines in social media and newspapers domestic and international reporting on the same article topic "Tiran Island" .. rest in infamy wikishit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

here read this ignominious losers of wikitrash !!

http://www.mc-doualiya.com/chronicles/email-mcd/20160412-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%A8%D9%83%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%85%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%88%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D9%88%D9%8A%D9%83%D9%8A%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A7-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D9%82%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9%88%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D8%B9%D9%88%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AC%D8%B2%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D8%B5%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%AA%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86

April 2016
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Tiran Island ‎. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bishonen &#124; talk 16:02, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Disruptive Editing
Please do not return to the pattern of Tendentious editing an Disruptive editing. Your actions resulted in your being blocked for 31 Hours. If this continues, you may be subjected to a permanent ban.Eassa (talk) 11:39, 16 April 2016 (UTC)