|
User talk:Septate/Archive 1
Septate, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!
The
Adventure
Welcome!Hello, Septate, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place Disambiguation link notification for March 16Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pinacoderm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ostia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:00, 16 March 2014 (UTC) Ostia March 2014
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:21, 19 March 2014 (UTC) March 2014
 You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Regarding your edits to IslamWikipedia is neutral and not censored. Wikipedia does not favor any particular religion's or irreligion's beliefs over others, no matter how popular or strongly held they may be: Origin of Life redirects to Abiogenesis instead of Young earth creationism, articles on various religions do not redirect to the article on superstition, and all site articles do not redirect to the article on God. The picture removed was originally made by a Muslim, because it is only certain sects within Islam that endorse iconoclasm at all times (as demonstrated by a number of pieces of Islamic art depicting different persons). Ian.thomson (talk) 15:12, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you.--Toddy1 (talk) 16:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC) Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Criticism of Islam
I agree with Foggas that it IS in-fact vandalism. It seems as the two users both know each other - whether that's in professionalism capacity or as a friend that is still yet to be known - as I have (very) recently found. Thus it makes sense as to why user Toddy1 is trying to 'down-play' what user Septate is doing. --George Howarth (talk) 20:13, 29 March 2014 (UTC)  Please consider this as a warning. You are engaged in an edit war over the article on Criticism of Islam. 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. Below is a list of the four/five reverts that each of you have made. 1. Septate 11:00, 23 March 2014 Wikipedia has a policy on edit warring. Please use the section at Talk:Criticism of Islam#Edits by Froggas to discuss this issue, and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to engage in this edit war, you may be blocked from editing.--Toddy1 (talk) 17:51, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Disambiguation link notification for April 11Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Indonesia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chinese (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:57, 11 April 2014 (UTC) April 2014 Your recent editing history at Islam shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
I am sorry, but what I wrote must have been unclear. What I hoped you would do would be to propose some changes to the article in the talk page. If you look at Talk:Arseniy Yatsenyuk#Proposed versions for ethnicity April 2014 you will see an example of what I meant.--Toddy1 (talk) 17:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for April 23Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tripura Rahasya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:57, 23 April 2014 (UTC) April 2014Referring to Voltaire, Folk religion, Entering Heaven alive and Nontrinitarianism. Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, and add original research, you may be blocked from editing. Bladesmulti (talk) 18:30, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Bottom line would be, that these all contents have been added to the page, months or years ago. You should read Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary, there wouldn't be a need to apply WP:OR in any of the pages, or involve into WP:SYNTH, WP:DONTLIKEIT. 11:32, 26 April 2014 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for April 30Hi. 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.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 30 April 2014 (UTC) A kitten for you! Your edits are great. Shkh.amir (talk) 18:05, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
unblockingis it ok if you unblock me(jungleewan)? i was blocked unfairly and by the time i complain from the person,i wasblocked already. respectfully, jungleewan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piachpia (talk • contribs) 21:01, 1 May 2014 (UTC) May 2014
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:31, 12 May 2014 (UTC) Islam revertThe User:Md iet didn't delete the image, they moved it. With your partial revert there are now two copies of the image in the article. Shenme (talk) 23:37, 22 May 2014 (UTC) some semanticsDear Septate, some important points to consider: Sunni Muslims are only a 'majority' if they make at least 51% of the Muslim population. The percentage point required for Sunnis to entitle themselves as 'vast majority' is probably subjective, but a minimum figure of 90% is likely to be appropriate. An example 1. Clearly 27% do not make a 'majority', let alone a 'vast majority'. Plus where there are statistics available, there is no harm using them. I do not see the need to remove them. Thanks --Peaceworld 15:04, 13 June 2014 (UTC) June 2014
June 2014
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Please don`t remove reliably sourced statistical data with a misleading edit summary. JimRenge (talk) 15:31, 21 June 2014 (UTC) June 2014
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:49, 7 June 2014 (UTC) Your recent editing history at Islam shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:49, 22 June 2014 (UTC) Reference Errors on 23 June
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC) Ramadhan Greetings!Dear Septate, inspite of our friction, Happy Ramadhan! Keep me in your prayers. --Peaceworld 15:46, 29 June 2014 (UTC)  June 2014
June 2014
Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. JimRenge (talk) 10:28, 30 June 2014 (UTC) Religion in SlovakiaI saw your recent edits on [Religion in Slovakia] and wondered if your claim: "There are an estimated 5,000 Muslims in Slovakia" is verifiable. (Ref. given: Sudor, Karol (2 October 2010). "Mešity majú cestu zarúbanú") When I recognized that this might be a websource without the link, I searched google and found this link which appears to be a blog/no reliable source with a reputation for fact checking. Please clarify why this website is a reliable source and give a translation of the sentence that claims there are an estimated 5,000 Muslims in Slovakia. The burden of proof is on you; unsourced or not reliably sourced claims will be removed. JimRenge (talk) 11:09, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
http://www.islamawareness.net/Europe/Slovakia/slovakia_news0002.html I think there is no need to use this source because pew research is much more reliable.Septate (talk) 15:59, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Religion in NorwayYour addition of an oversized picture of a mosque with this edit appears to give WP:UNDUE weight to Islam in this context. Islam is a minority religion in Norway and there is already a picture of a mosque in the corresponding section. When I saw your recent edit on [Religion in Norway] I wondered if your claim: Islam is practiced by 3.4% of Norwegian population, making it the second largest religion in Norway after various forms of Christianity (ref.: Religious communities and life stance communities, 1 January 2013) is verifiable. There is no percentage given in the source you provided. It says there are 120 882 muslims in Norway in January 2013. Could you please explain why you give a number of 3.4%? Inaccurate statistical data will be removed. Happy Ramadhan JimRenge (talk) 12:44, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
http://www.pewforum.org/2012/12/18/table-religious-composition-by-country-in-percentages/ When it comes to image, I think its not wp:UNDUE because image of a Church is also present on the article. It just depicts the religious diversity of Norway. Look at Religion in Guinea-Bissau, it is an image of a church in the lead despite the fact that Christians are only 10% of total population. I hope you will understand. Happy Ramadhan.Septate (talk) 13:40, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
June 2014
Disambiguation link notification for July 5Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Baron Omar Rolf von Ehrenfels, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Austrian. 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) 08:57, 5 July 2014 (UTC) Can you please identify where in the sources these statements are made?
--NeilN talk to me 04:44, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
HiHi mate. My condolences on those who lost their lives on Srebrenica massacre. Hope that no one from your family was murdered by fascists. elmasmelih (used to be KazekageTR) 18:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 12Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ahmedabad, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sultan Ahmad Shah. 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) 09:03, 12 July 2014 (UTC) July 2014Your recent editing history at Religion in Croatia shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. 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. NeilN talk to me 12:23, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC) What are you referring to, "not verified"? [1] --NeilN talk to me 17:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC) July 2014
Please explain why you deleted Ahmadi here. --NeilN talk to me 17:44, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 19Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Religion in the United Arab Emirates, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sharjah. 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) 08:59, 19 July 2014 (UTC) July 2014 ANI
You asked how the proposed limitation would work.
You understand what a revert is. Here is an example of two reverts: another editor made this edit, and you reverted it, and then a third editor reverted you. What you would have to do in this situation would be to post a clear statement on the article talk page saying what you were going to do, and explaining why this was a good idea. Then wait at least 6 hours for discussion. You would be expected to take note of the discussion in deciding whether to make the edit to the article. If there had been no discussion, you could go ahead 6 hours after you posted the statement on the talk page. You would also have to be careful not to do a revert on an article, if you had done a revert on the same article less than 48 hours before. The restriction would only apply to religion-related edits. If you made a mistake (we all do), you would be expected to self-revert as soon as you noticed that you had broken the restriction, or as soon as someone pointed it out to you. If you broke the restriction you could be blocked for a week for breaking the restriction. And if you kept on breaking it, the blocks might get bigger. (e.g. 1st time 1 week, 2nd time 1 month, etc.) The reason the restriction would include reverting vandalism, is that I know from another editor's experience how hard it is in the situation to distinguish between vandalism and non-vandalism. The idea is to make things clear, so you do not break the restriction.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
July 2014
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when. Thank you. Breawycker (talk to me!) 03:38, 23 July 2014 (UTC) An article very much needs a fresh pair of eyesAt Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Septate: alternative proposal, Iryna Harpy made a suggestion at 23:25, 21 July 2014: saying that he/sjhe would "actually like to encourage Septate to try to do some editing in non-religious subject areas of Wikipedia in order to develop a better sense of interacting with other editors/contributors without his (Septate is a he) emotional baggage triggering his WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality. Restrictions are a useful tool, but learning to edit in an environment where he doesn't feel that he is constantly on the defensive or offensive might be a positive experience. If nothing else, it would give him a chance to develop his understanding of policies and guidelines." I think this is a good idea. As a favour, please could you have a look at the article on the New Russia Party. If you compare the version 1 June with the current version you will see the changes that have taken place. Please review changes, and use your own judgment. Look at the sources being cited - are they being fairly represented? Are some people trying to censor information? Please use the talk page to explain any reverts you want to make. It would be good practice, to explain any reverts or controversial changes on the talk page six hours before making the change. The article very much needs a fresh pair of eyes - and you are completely unbiased on this subject.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:44, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
Boko nameDude. I just spent hours writing that, because it really needed doing. Surely u agree? I think I did a pretty good job, anyway. zzz 07:43, 24 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Signedzzz (talk • contribs)
Community imposed edit restrictionPer a consensus of the community at WP:ANI you are now subject to the following restrictions indefinitely for all edits which are related to religion:
If you violate these restrictions you may be blocked to enforce them or further restricted (such as a ban) by the community. If you wish to appeal these restrictions please do so at WP:AN, though I suggest that you wait at least 3-6 months before appealing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:33, 26 July 2014 (UTC) You've broken your edit restrictionsI've brought this up at WP:ANI. Dougweller (talk) 12:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC) Community imposed topic banPer a consensus of the community at WP:ANI you are now subject to the following sanction:
If you violate this sanction you may be blocked to enforce them or the period you are banned may be extended by any uninvolved adminisrator. If you wish to appeal these restrictions please do so at WP:AN, though per the sanction you should not do so for at least 6 months. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for August 5Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Aegialiinae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Caelius. 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) 09:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC) "Hate"?I've seen this post and feel I should answer. I don't "hate" you at all. I don't know you. But I have seen you edit in an unacceptable way, which has gone beyond edit-warring. You have a tendency to try to "get round" the rules. This has included deceptive edit summaries, claiming agreement on talk pages where there was none, and seemingly pretending that you haven't breached your edit restriction when all can see you had (and you must have known you had). If the way you edit became widespread, then Wikipedia would collapse in chaos. I would be very happy for you to edit Wikipedia, including religion-related articles, if you were to follow policy. If you think that I said what I said because I "hate" you then you haven't understood what has happened at ANI. Please don't fool yourself into thinking that what has happened is because anyone "hates" you. You need to read and understand what everyone has said and work on not doing it again. If you do that I'm sure you would become a very successful and productive editor - which would make me very happy. DeCausa (talk) 10:43, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 12Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Orphninae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cocoa. 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) 09:24, 12 August 2014 (UTC) Criticism of Hinduism.Hello Septate. I am Akshatra. I saw your edit on Wikipedia page of Criticism of Hinduism. You are kindly requested to please add it to your watch-list. A user repeatedly deletes the content as if Wikipedia is a Hindu website. With kind regards, Akshatra (talk) 17:58, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 18Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sathya Sai Organization, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indian. 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) 09:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC) Your views and actionsFirstly, you need to stop posting speeches quoting hadiths on neutral editors talk pages. They don't care about hadith. Secondly, stop edit-warring. You've already breeched 3RR and if I wanted to, I could report you and you may suffer a ban. But I'll refrain from doing that if you just relax and stop further disruptions. Lastly, if you want to engage in a discussion with me quoting hadiths etc. you can email me and I'll refute your POV, but such discussions do not belong on wikipedia. cӨde1+6 LogicBomb! 14:38, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 25Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gautama Buddha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mercury. 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) 11:39, 25 October 2015 (UTC) Hi, July 2016
Topic ban on religionHi Septate. In this edit, a topic ban on religion related material was imposed on you. I see you've been making religion related edits (e.g., [2]) and assume that the topic ban was lifted. Could you confirm that? @Callanecc: --regentspark (comment) 13:05, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Topic banHi Septate. Unless you can show otherwise, note that the topic ban on religion topics remains in place for you. One more edit on religion and you will be indef blocked. When in doubt as to whether something is religion related or not, I suggest you skip that edit and move on. Best wishes. --regentspark (comment) 12:54, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open! Hello, Septate. 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) Religion topic banHi Septate, regarding your edit to the lead of FGM, so far as I can tell (see the latest discussion in July 2016), you're still under a religion topic ban. Before you can edit in that area, you need to go to WP:AN and ask that it be lifted. SarahSV (talk) 18:39, 22 August 2018 (UTC) Topic ban appeal resultPlease see Special:Diff/856282056. The topic ban remains in effect. If you have any questions after viewing the close, please feel free to let me know and I will respond when possible. --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:40, 24 August 2018 (UTC) |
