User talk:Epson Salts

I Will edit whatever I wish

If you continue to remove pages about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict which include historical and contemporary sources, I fear that Wikipedia as a platform should be exposed.

"WP:ARBPIA3."

HAHA! Clever, clever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.231.236 (talk) 02:47, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Epson Salts, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Epson Salts! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Doctree (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

May 2016

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Naz Shah. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 19:26, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the above, please remember to 'complete' the edit-summary box at the base of the edit window before saving your changes. This is important so that other editors can quickly see what has been changed and why. It also forms part of the edit history of individual pages. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 19:31, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

i don't understand what you mean. Epson Salts (talk) 20:02, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When using visual editor, (as most, if not all, of your edits seem to be) when you click save page, you should see a further window which asks you to save the page but also asks you to describe what you have changed. (It also gives you other options such as continuing to edit). The source editor (if you 'switch' from visual or click 'edit source') has a summary box at the base of the edit window. Please summarise what you have changed when editing. Please also sign your posts on talk-pages by typing four tildes (~~~~) which will produce a signature and timestamp. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 19:44, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ok, thank you. Epson Salts (talk) 20:02, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for you help. can you also clarify what you wanted me to do in the first message you left me? Epson Salts (talk) 20:04, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you mean the one about the template removal. In this edit you removed the 'tags' placed there by another editor but did not resolve the issues described by them or leave an explanatory edit summary. There is nothing for you to do as the tags have been replaced but you should not remove maintenance tags without good reason or explanation. Also when replying to posts on talk-pages you can 'indent' replies (as I have done) by typing a colon (:) at the start of your post and then additional ones for subsequent posts. Eagleash (talk) 20:44, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

but what are the issues? I didn't see any description of what needs to be fixed. Epson Salts (talk) 22:38, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The tags clearly say that neutrality is disputed and that undue emphasis may have been placed on certain issues. (See also the tagged sections within the article). It's not a page I would have much interest in, so I would suggest you read or join the discussions on the talk page or contact the editor who added the tags (this can be found in the page history). Eagleash (talk) 07:59, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

Hello, I'm Waggie. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Brock Turner seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Waggie (talk) 03:50, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zionism is covered by discretionary sanctions under WP:ARBPIA

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

EdJohnston (talk) 13:45, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARBPIA3#500/30

I've mentioned this account at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. Sepsis II (talk) 00:21, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abbas

You restored an opinion article by two writers with seemingly no expertise on the topic, a source taken out specifically on BLP grounds. WP:BLP#Restoring deleted content requires such a restoration have talk page consensus, a talk page you are completely absent at. Please self-revert the revert and discuss on the talk page if you wish. nableezy - 02:17, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, I restored material sources to an academic book published by Oxford University Press. Epson Salts (talk) 06:30, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You didnt make this edit? That isnt an opinion article by two writers with seemingly no expertise on the topic? nableezy - 15:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did, and then added this source, which has the exact same claim made by an academic expert published by an academic press. What is the problem? Epson Salts (talk) 15:18, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the poor source is still in the "encyclopedia article". I have no problem with retaining the sentence or the new source you brought, I do have a problem with a commentary piece by two people with no expertise on the subject being used in a BLP on Wikipedia. nableezy - 16:18, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't share your opinion that that is a"poor source", but i don't feel strongly about it. You can remove that source if you like. Epson Salts (talk) 16:35, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Yaron Oz (footballer)

The article Yaron Oz (footballer) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. —Latchem 03:13, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

i've fixed it. Epson Salts (talk) 03:36, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Hello, I'm Malik Shabazz. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jewish Voice for Peace have been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:45, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It was very constructive- it undid your WP:SYNTH edits, which violate wikipedia policy. Epson Salts (talk) 01:59, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You've been notified

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Malik_Shabazz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamel Tebaast (talk • contribs) 04:34, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Spähpanzer SP I.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hotchkiss. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

May I ask; is this your first account on Wikipedia? Huldra (talk) 23:10, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed it is. Why do you ask? Epson Salts (talk) 23:10, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, just interested, Huldra (talk) 23:15, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Kabir Forensic Institute

With regard to this edit, find sources for the whole of the text you restored. And it would also help if you ensure that it's neutral.     ←   ZScarpia   05:16, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What part of the text do you think are not sourced? Epson Salts (talk) 13:48, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Before you restored the text, you should have made sure that every part of it liable to be questioned is reliably sourced. It should have been obvious to you if you had compared the text with the source you cited that the source did not verify all the statements made. On the Jenny Tonge talkpage, I've requested that you quote the relevant part of the book you cited in order to check that the source supports what you've stated. When a source is challenged, it is a requirement that it is shown that the source supports the text cited to it. Either provide a quotation or supply a weblink so that I can read the book myself.     ←   ZScarpia   14:18, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I've sourced everything . If you think otherwise, go to the talk page of the relevant article and explain which parts are not sourced. Epson Salts (talk) 17:21, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Leroy Troy

added a link pointing to Washboard

Sphaeromimus

added a link pointing to Washboard

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:05, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your amazing consistency

Comparing [1] to [2] and [3], one can see exactly what kind of editor you are. Zero^talk 23:23, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike you, I am an editor who understands wikipedia policy, and enforces it consistently. The editor I reverted is not new (has been editing since March 2015) , and they are not allowed to edit the articles they were editing, per WP:ARBPIA3. The new editor you were WP:BITING has been editing for all of two weeks, with 8 edits to his name, and more importantly, was not editing an article subject to that restriction. Now that's not too difficult to understand, is it? Do you need some help in seeing the different circumstances?Epson Salts (talk) 00:05, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever used a prior account on Wikipedia? nableezy - 14:45, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Unlike you, I am an editor who understands wikipedia policy, and enforces it consistently." The stench of pompous arseholery is emanating from that comment.     ←   ZScarpia   12:25, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orasis is at WP:A/E

and you've been mentioned in the complaint because you warned her/him. See WP:AE#Orasis. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:27, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blumenthal

I am contributing regarding the Elie Wiesel comments Blumenthal made, which some are trying to say are irrelevant and should not be included in the article (check a thread or two above your colloquy), but you're right I have not weighed in on the American Sniper thread yet. As far as the American Sniper issue goes, I didn't see the film and I don't feel quite as comfortable somehow. I'll try to weigh in but I think you're on solid ground regarding the supercilious throat clearing and faux rhetorical questioning that you say is Blumenthal's way of pretending to seek actual input instead of preaching to the long converted. I can't read Blumenthal directly too much at Alternet or Mondoweiss, it's just way too stressful and I am too old (51). Cheers. Quis separabit? 14:47, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I didn't see you name next to your comments since you signature which doesn't use your username so I mistakingly thought you weren't participating at all. Epson Salts (talk) 14:54, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, my username and signature are different. Quis separabit? 14:59, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zionism editing restriction

The warning about not editing Zionism does not appear on the Talk Page, therefore it is understandable that someone could edit that page without realising that the restriction applies there as well. Thanks for the warning.Guns of brixham (talk) 07:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dead-link template usage

The documentation for the dead-link template says: "If the article uses clickable footnotes, then this tag should be placed just before the </ref> that contains the dead link. The notice will then correctly appear in the reference section (instead of in the body of the text, which is not recommended)." Is there a reason why you're placing the template outside the <ref> macros (such as here, here and here)?     ←   ZScarpia   12:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Visual Edit does not allow you to do that. Epson Salts (talk) 13:57, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then perhaps you should use an alternative to Visual Edit to add dead-link templates?     ←   ZScarpia   14:27, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps. And perhaps not. Epson Salts (talk) 14:33, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I'll clean up after you. Or perhaps I'll just hit the revert button until you edit properly.     ←   ZScarpia   15:35, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever turns you on. Epson Salts (talk) 22:46, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration clarification request archived

Hi Epson Salts. The Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration clarification request, which you were listed as a party to, has been closed and archived to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 3 #Clarification request: Palestine-Israel articles 3 (October 2016) at the direction of the Committee. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 14:16, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration Enforcement request closed

Hello Epson Salts, a request in which you participated has been closed [4] with the following result:

Epson Salts is cautioned that further attempts at wikilawyering and obstructionism is likely to lead to sanctions. No further action is taken at this time. The Wordsmith^Talk to me 15:37, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Regards, The Wordsmith^Talk to me 18:11, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See an appeal of this AE closure at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Arbitration Enforcement review. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:40, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Epson Salts. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]