User talk:Wikipal11119

I have rolled back your edits because they were poorly sourced and because they are contentious and relate to living people so should be discussed on the article Talk pages first. Guy (help!) 16:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia says "Use of standard rollback for any other purposes – such as reverting good-faith changes which you happen to disagree with – is likely to be considered misuse of the tool. When in doubt, use another method of reversion and supply an edit summary to explain your reasoning." Guy (help!)

May 2020
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:. Guy (help!) 17:09, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

So now let's have a talk about sourcing, our biographies of living people policy (BLP) and the like. So now what you do is you use your Sandbox (the link is above) and write up a revised version for the first article, say Israel on Campus Coalition, that uses only sources that are considered reliable (the green box in https://www.adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/ is a good guide) and which only reflects, but does not draw conclusions from, those sources. Then you can discuss it on the article's Talk page and see what other editors think.
 * Electronic Intifada is not a reliable source (see Reliable sources/Perennial sources).
 * The Nation is considered partisan and its statements should be attributed and should not be asserted as fact.
 * ProPublica is reliable
 * Haaretz is biased ion the area of Israel / Palestine and should be handled with care, with attribution for opinion pieces.
 * The Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs is superficially OK but likely to have a dog in the fight so should be used with caution.
 * WRMEA does not appear to meet our reliability criteria (see ).
 * Al Jazeera generally is reliable.
 * al-shabaka.org is an unknown, you should seek clarification on this. It is clearly activist.
 * The Forward is also clearly partisan.
 * Open Hillel is not a reliable source.

Oh, and you also need one of these:

All clear now? Guy (help!) 17:37, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Admin noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Guy (help!) 20:51, 22 June 2020 (UTC)