User talk:Bobisland

Welcome!

Hi Bobisland! I noticed your contributions to Abu Omar al-Shishani and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Longhair\^talk 04:16, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021 - final warning over repeated personal attacks

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Jeppiz (talk) 16:20, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources

It's recommended that you review WP:RSP regarding your use of unreliable (deprecated) sources. - Amigao (talk) 13:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RT is a deprecated source not a blacklisted one and the article itself is a primary source of a statement, also removing deprecated sources doesn't exclude users from edit warring Bobisland (talk) 11:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31h for WP:3RR, edit-warring. 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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  User:Ymblanter (talk) 08:46, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Bobisland! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, hello i have questions about editing and wikipedia sent me here, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Bobisland! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Question about rules, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Bobisland! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Are there any wiki users that offer their revert vandalism tools for users who don’t have it?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Bobisland! Your additions to Censorship of YouTube have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

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. DanCherek (talk) 18:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

Your edit to Islamic State has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia 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. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 14:14, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I used Reuters? Bobisland (talk) 19:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 09:05, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 09:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Hello, I'm FormalDude. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to PragerU have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. ––FormalDude (talk) 16:40, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feb 2023

Your edits on the sanction waivers exclude all information critical of it and only include the United Nations donations, which doesn’t have to seek a exemption license and isn’t influenced under any sanctions, there is already a wiki page dedicated to sanctions and the donations are already represented in the positions tab as one author used them as an example alongside his positions on the sanctions, if you want to include it then add it alongside his example of how western countries donated billions, it is also a poor source as other more notable media contradict his claims of sanctions not influencing humanitarian aid and etc Bobisland (talk) 04:14, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I dont agree with your view, but since I am not well-versed in this topic or considering the general format of other "against sanctions" articles, I am not pressing this. Thank you ~~Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 05:01, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Criticism of Facebook#Move review and splits, merges, and retitle proposals for Meta Platforms family of articles

Hello Bobisland! Per your recent contributions to the Criticism of Facebook article, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind reviewing and leaving comments in the section I added to its talk page on 4 March 2023 to facilitate a new discussion about a potential move review and splits, merges, and retitle proposals for Meta Platforms family of articles. Thanks! -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:39, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Asrar al-Qabandi

Hello, Bobisland. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Asrar al-Qabandi".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 13:07, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page comments out of order

Hey Bobisland, which comment did I put out of order?[1] I don't think I did that but I agree with you that out of order/incorrectly nested comments can be frustrating. Looking at my most recent comment I don't think I edited a previous comment and I think I nested it correctly trying to indicate which comment I was replying to. However, contrary to my popular believe (damn it) I don't always get these things right. Anyway, I'm confused by the comment but wanted to take the discussion off the talk page. I hope you don't mind. Springee (talk) 12:21, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AIV

Do not file reports at WP:AIV like the one you did regarding Summer178 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Any vandalism by this user was committed in January 2023. AIV is intended to report recent vandalism, not edits made almost nine months ago. Your report was an an abuse of the noticeboard.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:10, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

what is the timeline for a edit to be considered recent? Bobisland (talk) 17:22, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's combination of the recentness of the vandalism and the warnings, as well as whether the user has been blocked before. Not only was the last vandalism allegedly committed back in January but so was the last warning. I can't give you a brightline time frame, but many admins won't block if the vandalism is older than 24 hours. I strongly urge you to stay away from AIV as it does not appear that you understand how this works.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:11, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can I just ignore your advice and still use the report vandalism feature or I have to stop? Bobisland (talk) 19:42, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1RR violation

You just made this [2] and this [3] edits. In both cases you indicated in edit summary that you are making a revert. Please note that the page is under 1RR restriction. Please self-revert your last edit or you may be reported on WP:AE. Thanks, My very best wishes (talk) 20:37, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You were the one who deleted it after reverting other edits? Bobisland (talk) 23:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What parts are you referencing for the revert guideline? Bobisland (talk) 23:32, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did not revert anything, and in any case I made just one edit on the page during last few days. I am referring to your own edit summaries (diffs above), i.e. "Reverted edit that didn’t reach consensus..." (1st diff) and "Reverted to previous consensus..." (2nd diff). Based on that, you understand that you made reverts, do not you? They are just a few hours apart from each other. These are two reverts during 24 hour period. This article talk page [4] has a banner: "You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article". Hence, this is a violation by you. Please self-revert your 2nd edit. My very best wishes (talk) 23:55, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’m referencing your edit where you summarized it as “such debates hardly belong to the lead. One should focus on facts” in which you deleted the Hamas officials statement for why they attacked which reached consensus and their goals which was later added and didn’t reach consensus, I called my edits reverts because they added this text back so it’s easier for people skimming thru edits to notice it, they aren’t technical reverts, I also don’t understand why you deleted this text which was referenced by reliable sources representing Hamas officials unless your calling the blockade and settler violence a debate that isn’t a fact? Bobisland (talk) 00:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We are talking about your edits here. I have nothing to do with them. In your edit summaries (2 diffs above) you said that both of them were reverts. My very best wishes (talk) 03:54, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you discuss the content dispute after reverting your second revert?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:05, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because it’s not an actual revert Bobisland (talk) 00:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your second revert is obvious because it reinstated your first. Your first reverted this edit of November 18.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:36, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Bobisland (talk) 14:59, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at 2023 Israel–Hamas war. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 17:03, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

“finally seemingly admitting they had indeed violated 1RR but still not self-reverting but instead editing article for other purposes)”

the text was already removed so I couldn’t and I said ok because I felt if I brought up disruptive editing you would disagree with me, the user who deleted the text which I reverted has also self reverted it after you blocked me for not reverting the text that was already removed Bobisland (talk) 17:27, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]