To get some practice editing you can
use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click
here to start it.
Please remember to:
Always
sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the
edit toolbar or by typing four
tildes~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your
signature, a link to your talk page, and a
timestamp.
Leave descriptive
edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to
have some fun!
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Hazelwood East High School. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
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.
That was my intention. I was questioning an aspect of the page and it would obviously draw people in to discuss with me or explain the what and why
Vladimir Hunter (
talk)
23:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
If you are refering to a talk page topic I made in reference to the indiscriminate bombing of Gaza by europeans, I was able to rewrite it to satisfy your demands without including a single source. All I did was question an existing source.
Vladimir Hunter (
talk)
17:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Despite
Acroterion messages (also cc
Doug Weller, you just started this discussion:
Talk:Helldivers 2#Hate to sound obnixious buuuuutt.... This game released at the same time Israel began indiscriminately bombing Gaza and we are seeing alot of reality in fiction. One of the main planets is called "Cyberstan" and the corpses of the Bugs are harvested for some compound calle 710 ("Oil" flipped upside down). Helldivers 2 was released in February this year. The conflict of the
Israel–Hamas war started in October. Video games are in development for a long time.
Helldivers 2#Development and release states development started in December 2020. So that would be your own interpretation. If Helldivers 2 is satire on imperialism, what does "Cyberstan" and 710 have to do with Israel's actions in Gaza? This seems very odd to me. The problem is I can't find any news articles or sources directly addressing any of these things. They exist but I'm having a hard time finding them, I'll come back here when I get time to find them and we can talk about where this information should fit in the article. So you can't find the sources but they exist? How do you know these sources exist if you can't find them at all? Next time, maybe find the sources first.
soetermans.
↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK23:00, 20 April 2024 (UTC)reply
You ask me how could I possibly know the game is actually satire if there are no "Reliable sources" saying such. I assure you that (1) I play the game (2) I live on this planet, (3) I see the same type of propoganda spewed in my country everyday, (4) I've had this exact propoganda levied against
my ethnicity for centuries and (5) according to this websites own rules, as I have read hours ago, Wikipedia prioritizes verifibility over the truth, its own words. The lack of "Relieible sources" in this website's standards in and of itself is not proof of absence. It is not even absence. I understand deleting an edit made without sources but why badger me for daring to propose a change at all?
The game, as well as the first game, chooses to parody and satarize facism through allegories of imperialistic wars waged by Europeans and the USA against countries in the middle east. I'm not so stupid to think they knowingly dropped this game months after europeans began their latest landgrab and propoganda train without a hint of irony. But it's siginfigant, and I stated my intent to, in addition to stating the obvious, finding sources to this website's standard that reference the connections I chose to use as examples (Not edit requests, examples) or at least half of it.
If I didn't know any better I'd say you're just offended by those examples moreso than any actual rule violation. I've noticed that as a running theme among users on this website since I made the mistake of trying to contribute to current events. Do you have any actual authority here or is this "Despite previous warnings" talk just hot air?
No activity since the block, and, unless you object, I was inclined to leave their parting shot there so it's abundantly clear why they're indeffed. If they come back with abuse, I'll remove talkpage access. Acroterion(talk)12:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
You are violating the restrictions you are under for all pages broadly construed related to the Arab-Israeli conflict
I don’t recall ever being placed on a restriction. And why would a restriction apply to how I responded to false assertions made by random users on my own talk page? That sounds ridiculous
Vladimir Hunter (
talk)
15:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Now I have to wonder if you are competent enough to edit. What part of " 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." don't you understand? And you cannot discuss the topic area anywhere although you can make formal requests on talk pages. No more warnings, you should be clear by now.
Doug Wellertalk16:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
A formal request is exactly what I did, but fine, can tell when I’m not wanted. So unlike you I’ll be blunt on what I’m really thinking.
Clearly you chose to come here to heckle me for daring to have any empathy in the first place. I was hoping you were just doing your job but looks like you were also sitting and waiting for an excuse to badger me, over a so called technicality video game article. Why do you or @
Soetermans: expect to be able to come here and insult me without me being offended by that? You should have heard the “Glass house” analogy” by now. Then to run off and cry foul to your friends and fellow moderators about how you totally didn’t come here with bad energy but somehow at the same time the other guy deserved your bad energy.
”you can’t discuss the topic” tell that to the other guy and then tell me how I’m supposed to respond to mentions of a “Topic” they chose to make on my own talk page rather than the public one.
“You are incompetent” sounds like a laced version of “Im not sure if you agree with me and my worldview, I just might block you permanently next time” so I’m chances are you’re borderline retarded.
I won’t be coming back. I can promise you that. I’ll even delete and throw away my password to this account. Whether or not you ban me won’t matter, but if it makes you feel better 🤷🏿♂️
Vladimir Hunter (
talk)
16:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Fine. I didn't say you were incompetent, just wondered why you didn't understand what seems clear to me. You started a discussion, a formal request would be "change x to y because". And no one stops you from saying to someone I can't discuss that, or even asking them not to post to your talk page. But that's all moot now, your decision might save a lot of bother.
Doug Wellertalk16:43, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
It does.
I've seen users get clamped down even harder when they dared to ask anyone to stop talking on their talk page so we both know that's bullshit.
This is a regular administrative action dealing with abuse of talkpages for forum chat. Additional sanctions may be imposed if you do that again, and arbitration sanctions may be imposed if you violate the arbitration restrictions that have been repeatedly explained to you concerning the Arab-Israeli conflict. Acroterion(talk)16:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply