Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:54, 16 January 2018

Expectant of Light, you are invited to the Teahouse!

WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge Invite

Hello Expectant of Light. You have been invited to join WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the Asia-related articles on Misplaced Pages. You received this invitation due to your interest in, or edits relating to or within the scope of the project. If you would like to join or just help out a bit, please visit the project page, and add your name to the participants. If you know someone who might be interested, please invite them by: {{subst:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge Invite (1)|~~~~}} Thanks, Mhhossein 06:56, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages and copyright

Hello Expectant of Light, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. All or some of your addition(s) to Background and causes of the Iranian Revolution and elsewhere have been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Misplaced Pages, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Misplaced Pages:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Misplaced Pages:Copyrights. You may also want to review Misplaced Pages:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Misplaced Pages:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Misplaced Pages articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Misplaced Pages project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Misplaced Pages:Copying within Misplaced Pages.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:07, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Can you create this article?

Hi man! I found you at English Wiki. Can you create Independence, freedom, the Islamic Republic for Iran's national motto? Benyamin-ln (talk) 10:08, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

@Benyamin-ln: Hi! Sounds like an interesting topic. I may when I get some free time. --Expectant of Light (talk) 11:46, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Mosul liberation for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mosul liberation is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mosul liberation until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ansh666 20:26, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

Your addition to Mosul liberation has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Misplaced Pages without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Misplaced Pages. For legal reasons, Misplaced Pages cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Misplaced Pages takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:56, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Diannaa: Ah, bad that I'm again warned for copy-right violations but I wanted to say these are not intentional. As for photos they didn't mention in the caption the photographers' name so I couldn't supply that info in the descriptions but since they are taken by photographers working for the publisher Tasnim News Agency and the publisher publishes them under Creative Commons, I thought it was ok! Was it? --Expectant of Light (talk) 14:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't check regarding the images, as they were deleted at the Commons, and I am not an administrator on that wiki. You will have to visit that website and discuss your concerns with the admin that deleted the photos. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:09, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Expectant of Light. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Houthi deniel

Hi We couldn't write that the Houthis have denied because there are no source. --Panam2014 (talk) 20:56, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi! I read that in a source but haven't got the time to find out where I read it. And I didn't restore that either since you objected! --Expectant of Light (talk) 22:02, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

That user have replaced "saudi aligned" ny "saudi state" without proof. And he have accused contributors for having conflict of interest. --Panam2014 (talk) 16:07, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi, also per Misplaced Pages:Identifying reliable sources, a reliable source could be biaised. So what is your opinion about his tag in the article ? --Panam2014 (talk) 20:57, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

DYK for 2017 Lebanon–Saudi Arabia dispute

On 19 December 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2017 Lebanon–Saudi Arabia dispute, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Saudi Arabia's government has been accused of detaining Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, following his abrupt resignation while in Saudi Arabia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2017 Lebanon–Saudi Arabia dispute. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 2017 Lebanon–Saudi Arabia dispute), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 00:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

January 2018

Your recent editing history at 2017–18 Iranian protests 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 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—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Peter Dunkan (talk) 05:18, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Peter Dunkan: Before accusing editors of edit war make sure whether they have violated the three-revert rule or that they are reverting in good faith or not. As for the photos of protests, they are verifiable and reported by other sources. You can't also accuse of bias by your personal speculation. We only reflect what the sources say. --Expectant of Light (talk) 05:27, 4 January 2018 (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 Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. The thread is Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Expectant_of_Light reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: ). Thank you. Dr. K. 05:46, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018

Your recent editing history 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 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—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. zzz (talk) 10:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Signedzzz: My reverts were in good-faith and explained and this section has been discussed on the talkpage. The onus on you is to explain why you oppose inclusion of sourced and engage in reverts. --Expectant of Light (talk) 10:57, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

You have been opposed on talk. The onus is on you to gain consensus. You will be blocked if you continue edit-warring, regardless of "good faith". zzz (talk) 11:04, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Signedzzz: I've been not opposed to include material. Two of us support inclusion. The other refused to comment. I warned you for edit-waring! Be wary of boomerang! --Expectant of Light (talk) 11:05, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

"Two of us support for inclusion". Not true. WP:Competence is required. PS even if dozens of editors were supporting you, you would still be blocked for edit-warring. See WP:3RR zzz (talk) 11:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Signedzzz: So far you've been engaged in edit-warring in bad-faith while ignoring the discussion in which two of us clearly supported inclusion of material. The other has refused to comment so far. WP:Competence is required definitely. But you seem to lack good-faith to accurately represent the talkpage discussion and accuse your party. --Expectant of Light (talk) 11:18, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

No I will not accuse my party without good faith, thank you. Please stop pinging me. zzz (talk) 11:20, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Signedzzz: So explain why you removed sourced material even after your rationale for doing so was refuted! It's clearly you who are edit-warring and you only need to make another reversion in bad-faith to violate the 3-revert rule and invite possible sanctions on your account! --Expectant of Light (talk) 11:25, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Feel free to discuss on talk. zzz (talk) 11:42, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

4R at 2017–18 Iranian protests

Hi Expectant of Light. In the spirit of what I told you yesterday, I am not going to add a new report, but you are again over 3 reverts at that article. The reverts are as follows (UTC time):

• "Undid revision 819072512 by Icewhiz (talk) No such consensus yet. Please don't engage in edit-war. The content are totally verifiable regardless of what you think of Iranian media." Today at 6:17 AM
• "Discuss on the talkpage before changing sourced, verifiable content." Today at 6:11 AM
• "Undid revision 818918862 by (talk) already discussed. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:2017%E2%80%9318_Iranian_protests#A_lot_of_critical_analyses_on_US/Israel/KSA_support_for_the_unrest" Yesterday at 9:51 AM
• "Undid revision 818917214 by Signedzzz (talk) These are nowhere covered in the page and they include analyses. And there are more! Don't remove sourced material." Yesterday at 9:42 AM

Please be more careful in the future. Best regards. Dr. K. 07:55, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Dr.K.: Oh, thanks! I didn't notice I was reaching the 3rr over the 24-hour threshold. And these were also different reverts. But thanks for notifying me anyway! As you see we are deeply involved in the talk and I expected others to also reach consensus before making major changes. --Expectant of Light (talk) 08:02, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Good to know. By the way, 3RR is any revert, irrespective of if the material is the same or not. All the best. Dr. K. 08:04, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018

Your recent editing history at 2017–18 Iranian protests 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 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—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Peter Dunkan (talk) 06:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Peter Dunkan: There is a talk page discussion on this and I was reverting by citing the talk and left a new comment on talk too! Whereas you have not participated in the discussion and reverted without any explanation! So you appear to be the one edit-warring but yes people can coldly stick to the 3rr technicality but violate the soul of Misplaced Pages guidelines! --Expectant of Light (talk) 06:36, 9 January 2018 (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 Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring. Thank you.Icewhiz (talk) 06:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Icewhiz: You would have demonstrated some good-faith if you had considered the nature of my reverts as well as my response to Peter Dunkan above! --Expectant of Light (talk) 06:53, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

You are over 3RR in the past 24Hrs even without Bret Stephens - which I agree was on-consensus. And you were over 3RR on 7 Jan (as Dr. K pointed out to you - and I noticed as well at the time, but held off from reporting).Icewhiz (talk) 06:57, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

BLP ds alert - Jan 2018

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Template:Z33