User talk:Vice regent

Hi, this is my discussion page. Do not hesitate to leave message for me. Old messages are eventually archived.

Archives

Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Re: "unprovoked"

Hello Vice regent. Are you able to remove the IP and non-EC users from your thread? They should not be able to leave comments that are not straight forward edit-requests. I would also encourage you to emphasize NPOV rather than opening up forum-like discussion with a counterargument. It's pretty clear that "unprovoked" is POV, need not go further than that. Bitspectator ⛩️ 19:10, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bitspectator done.VR (Please ping on reply) 19:43, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to get in touch

Hello - I'm a reporter getting in touch about some edits -- could you please find me on Twitter on @margimurphy? Margimurphy (talk) 20:12, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have twitter. You can message me here, I'll try to respond asap. You may also email me. But please read WP:CANVASSING before emailing me.VR (Please ping on reply) 20:48, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to sign your warning

Move War Topic, You forgot to sign your warning in line with policy. WP:UW

PS: The Beirut attack on the Hezbollah headquarters article/stub has come together so quickly and well, it's really impressive.

RCSCott91 (talk) 12:25, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RCSCott91 I don't understand. I do see a signature in my edit.VR (Please ping on reply) 12:31, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, I missed it. Edit: I realize now, the view on my phone wraps the text just perfectly to kitty corner your signature on my mobile screen.

RCSCott91 (talk) 12:55, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where was the PETN explosion component in the device and Orientalism

Hey VR. First of all I would like to say a big thank you, for your careful editing and clarifications to the 2024 Lebanon pager explosions. Just thanks!

Because the discussions page is "protected" I point out here that the sentence in the article: "The New York Times reported that the Israeli intelligence operated BAC Consulting and had created two other unnamed shell corporations to hide their involvement.[29] The pagers produced for Hezbollah had batteries that integrated 3 grams (0.11 ounces) of the explosive PETN in such a way that it would have been extremely difficult to detect.[67]"

That's probably misleading. Note a battery or even a rechargeable battery (primary and secondary batteries) are constantly being replaced ;-) And note this is from Ronen Bergman (who is known to work closely with Israel's intelligence community) "How Israel Built a Modern-Day Trojan Horse: Exploding Pagers, The New York Times, 18 September 2024". → Downright gleeing about terrorism by associating terrorism with the classical “Tales” of Odysseus and the elite heroes of the Hellenes.

A report in The Guardian quotes a Lebanese security source as saying "Mossad injected a board inside of the device that has explosive material." This contradicts the claim that the explosive was in the battery. → "Hezbollah device blasts: how did pagers and walkie-talkies explode and what do we know about the attacks?, The Guardian, 19 September 2024". The pagers were impregnated with explosives, the pagers were the explosives. Having the explosive on or integrated into the circuit board would make it easier not to be to detected and would make detonation control much simpler.

And then there is one more thing else worth to be mention: Hezbollah moved with it's military wing over completely to Fiber-optic communications. The military wing doesn't use pager and doesn't use walkie-talkies. Who were using pagers/walkie-talkies were the local policemen, firefighters, medical personal — what can be called the Civil Hezbollah. The management of Civil Life, that manages a huge slice of Beirut and the country and it has to provide Law and Order, security, and health care etc.

Times of Israel:

  • Lebanon’s private medical facilities, which house 85% of all hospital beds in the country, are at full capacity following last week’s attacks on communication devices held by Hezbollah members, Sleiman Haroun, president of Lebanon’s Syndicate of Private Hospitals, has said.(here)

2008 there was a big huge brouhaha in Lebanon where pro-american and pro-israel officials were gunning for H.'s private fiber optic network, a communication network that H. had set up nationwide throughout Lebanon by itself for itself as defense against Israeli electronic warfare.

The anti-Hezbollah news outlet “This is Beirut”:

  • Hezbollah’s telecommunications network is highly sophisticated, characterized by a distributed fiber optic architecture. It supports Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP), enabling high-speed internet calls rather than relying on traditional lines. This network interfaces seamlessly with global technologies, facilitating anonymous cyber-attacks and funding through Virtual Private Networks (VPNs). Additionally, it comprises an Autonomous System (AS), Internet Protocol (IP), a range of IP addresses, a satellite, and other installations that will be elaborated upon shortly. (here)

Just as antidote for the orientalism about the outdated-obsolete-antiquated-archaic pager communications in H.'s military wing.

I wish you the all best. Regards, --87.170.202.11 (talk) 15:29, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. The source says "In his view, the procurement of pagers and walkie-talkies was intended to “carry out daily tasks,”" but doesn't explicitly say that pagers were mainly used for civilian tasks. If you have any sources, please link them.
Do you have any specific edit request you'd like to make? You can make that as an edit request at Talk:2024 Lebanon pager explosions.VR (Please ping on reply) 15:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I can not. It is "protected". --87.170.202.11 (talk) 15:53, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see Daniel Case protected it. Per WP:ARBECR, you are allowed to make a specific edit request in the "Talk:" namespace. I suppose you can write your edit request here. Daniel, if they make a specific edit request here, am I allowed to then (assuming it's not disruptive) move it to Talk:2024 Lebanon pager explosions? VR (Please ping on reply) 16:02, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am not allowed to make any specific edit request in that talk-page. I simply can not. I am only allowed to view its source ;-)
My request would be: 1. We have to add (per The Guardian) that it was the circuit board of the pagers, that was infected with the explosive PETN, not the battery. 2. We have to add that Hezbollah's military wing used since 2008 for its communications its fiber optic network (will look for an other source). But please, I do not want to be disruptive or bothersome. Regards, -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.170.195.60 (talk) 16:27, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, moved your request.VR (Please ping on reply) 01:12, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would move it to the edit-request section on RFPP. Daniel Case (talk) 00:35, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hello.

In the "Attack" section of the 2024 Hezbollah headquarters strike article, can you actually display the specific bomb Mark 84 bomb with its name, which has been obscured in the Wikilink under the label "2,000-pound bombs", when the other bunker buster bombs like BLU-109 bomb are displayed with their names in the article?

(Also, if units have to be displayed, both the metric and imperial units must be displayed in Wikipedia articles, not one or the other. 95% of the world population use only the metric system.)

Thank you. Oirattas (talk) 07:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Oirattas, sure done. 2,000 lbs is just very common to use. VR (Please ping on reply) 07:10, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you add a metric {convert}, like it has been done in the rest of the article? Wikipedia articles need to include both units. English Wikipedia is not for an American audience only. 95% of the world population use only the metric system in their daily lives, and will not necessearily understand imperial units. If the article was not protected, I would have added the converter myself. Oirattas (talk) 07:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DoneVR (Please ping on reply) 07:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Oirattas (talk) 07:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on October 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page October 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

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, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 07:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Using a terrorist organization as a source

In these edits [1] and [2], you used Samidoun, an organization proscribed as a terrorist group in Germany and the Netherlands, to support claims about Samir Kuntar’s innocence according to his own account. Samidoun is reported by sources to have ties to or act as a proxy for the PFLP, itself designated a terrorist organization by the US, EU, Canada, and the UK. This is particularly concerning in light of your other recent edits, such as this one [3], where you introduced a definition of Hezbollah as a "resistance group" in WP:VOICE in the article's very first sentence (especially strange after seeing this [4]). I believe this falls short of the standards expected in our topic area. ABHammad (talk) 17:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ffs, that a government says some group is a terrorist organization has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not it is a reliable source for some statement. The IDF is a proscribed terrorist organization in Iran, should we not cite it for anything? VR, delete this at your leisure. nableezy - 18:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tagging @ScottishFinnishRadish and @Barkeep49, who seem to be the main admins monitoring this area right now, as well as @Aoidh, @ToBeFree. More evidence regarding editor conduct that typically doesn’t reach AE can be found here and should be considered when deciding whether to accept the motion to start a case and afterwards, if it proceeds. ABHammad (talk) 19:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you have an issue with the reliability of the source bring it to WP:RSN to determine consensus. The views of nations can be evidence of unreliability, but don't immediately make a source unusable. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Samidoun is a registered charity in Canada. That Israel and some of its allies have determined that suppporting the rights of Palestinian prisoners is an act of terror is not something that determines its reliability. That you can browbeat an editor who is actually editing in good faith and improving articles with these bogus insinuations is indeed one of the things that doesnt typically reach AE but in a rational world would. nableezy - 19:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I used Samidoun to cite the statement "Kantar denied the accusations and maintained his innocence", not for anything nefarious. Of course, I could have used plenty of much more reliable sources for that statement, and when my mistake was pointed out, I used Guardian and CNN instead. Samidoun's lack of reliability has nothing to do with Germany's unfortunate repression of free speech. For example Al-Jazeera has been banned in Israel yet it remains reliable for wiki standards. When I get the chance, I do plan to write an article on Suppression of free speech during the Israel-Hamas war.VR (Please ping on reply) 19:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1RR

1 2 Andre🚐 18:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consecutive reverts count as a single one. I deliberately break my reverts into multiple reverts so as to make it easy to follow what I'm doing so that you may object to my edits partially rather than as a whole. That moves us more quickly towards consensus.VR (Please ping on reply) 13:43, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind showing me where in the policy that is? Andre🚐 13:52, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:3rr: "A series of consecutively saved reverting edits by one user, with no intervening edits by another user, counts as one revert." VR (Please ping on reply) 13:58, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

Hi, I would like to ask you something, since I cannot edit the page on the Israel and Hamas war, I would like to ask you if you would mind putting up some photos of the events, two photos, one of the events of the raid on the al-Aqsa hospital, and another of the children buried in the refrigerator. the first is called GZ0Ubx4XUAQPot3.jpg, the second GZ6tn3rWkAAQ3RJ.jpg, thank you very much in any case Bajricvasco (talk) 12:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bajricvasco For the first one, we would have to get Waleed's permission or public domain release, otherwise it will be deleted. Would you like to enquire with him? Andreas JN466 09:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ICRC recently posted a video you may find very helpful

It is about international humanitarian law as it relates to Islamic law. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuAG7lU-as

Also, I replied to your comment on my talk page, but didn't notice the request to ping you upon doing so. Note that you can use the Subscribe button to have Wikipedia do so automatically. LesbianTiamat (talk) 05:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Putting in American financial support for Israel in the very first paragraph of the lead

@Vice regent The original goalpost was, ```"Can I write in the Israel lead that it has extensive financial and military backing from the USA?"``` Most people after that, commented about the first paragraph probably because they realized that certain articles already have leads with information included that you have implied shouldn't be in the lead based on WP, but instead are simply not in the first paragraph. Which as my response, to user:Selfstudier, "Possibly, get some sources together and go to the Israeli talk page. I'm not saying that exact wording would be agreed specifically because the USA normally gives around 3-4 billion and Israel spends 27-28 billion on military spending itself. So the word "extenstive" is doing a lot of work. But ~10% is ~10%."

You took my words out of context (as a response to what I assume was a hyperbolic statement from Selfstudier), didn't even cite correctly because lead includes way more than just the first paragraph.

I'm pretty certain we are not supposed to have discussions, regardless of maturity level, across article talk pages. I have no idea what policy it is but either remove the question on Israel talk page and apologize to those you, without consent, pinged across to another article's talk page. Or if you are sincere in wanting to make that change to the Israeli article, rewording and remove those users you pinged including myself.

Thank you,

RCSCott91 (talk) 19:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused. When you said "go to the Israeli talk page", you meant Talk:Israel, right? And can you clarify what you mean by "because lead includes way more than just the first paragraph"? I believe the context of yours (and selfstudier's comments) was the first paragraph of the lead. Did I misunderstand that? VR (Please ping on reply) 00:39, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vice regent Don't play that misunderstanding argument. You didn't just ping me and selfstudier to the Israeli talk page. You were trying to make a statement and it wasn't appropriate.
Either delete the topic and apologize to those you pinged over to the Israeli talk page without their consent or reword your Israeli talk page topic (removing those you pinged) and apologize to them. Failure to do either, I will go to dispute resolution.
WP:CONDUCTDISPUTE RCSCott91 (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome to pursue dispute resolution, but a few points:
  • Discussions about changes to a particular article, in this case the article Israel, should happen at the appropriate talk page. There is nothing wrong with starting a discussion there.
  • It is assumed that it is ok to ping anyone, unless they have clearly said otherwise. There are advantages to pinging everyone in a discussion. You also have the option of muting notifications from certain users.
  • You can't substantially edit your own comment (let alone "delete the topic") after others have responded to it.
Finally, I'd rather get back to the substance of the issue, which is what should be in the first paragraph as opposed to the rest of the lead.VR (Please ping on reply) 14:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. RCSCott91 (talk) 21:57, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Noticeboard Notice (October 2024)

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:35, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As to not drag out AE any longer

Responding to this, I don't disagree, and I'm sure there is other sourcing that presents the information differently. With what was presented and taking a quick look the report wasn't flagrantly incorrect. My point is that AE isn't the venue to look at 40 such diffs, compile or have other editors compile sources for an analysis, and compare the language used, sources available, and how that changes depending on the subject of the article. That's what the evidence and workshop phases of an Arbcom case are for. The fact that you wanted to (and should!) present counter-evidence and analysis shows that the limitations of AE can't handle that. It would be one thing if there were a few examples given, as is often the case, and the subject of the report can reply, but as I'm you're well aware if we start setting up diff analysis tables and wording examinations we'll have a hundred thousand words there in a week. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AE not being the venue does not mean it should be referred to ArbCom. It means you should decline to take action. If a user wants to go to ArbCom with that complaint that is their prerogative, you referring a case however is the admins saying ArbCom should deal with this, not that AE should not. nableezy - 20:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They should deal with it as there is a case on its way. There were also (and have been in the past) accusations that the report and behavior is tendentious. That is something Arbcom should be looking at in the coming case. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:40, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ScottishFinnishRadish, got it, thanks.VR (Please ping on reply) 20:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Tel al-Sultan attack

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Tel al-Sultan attack, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

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, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for 2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon

On 15 November 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 05:38, 15 November 2024 (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) 00:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 5 arbitration case opened

You offered a statement in an arbitration enforcement referral. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 23:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC), which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 06:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cite missing from Baalbek

Hi VR. You added a short form reference for "Daher 2024" to Baalbek[5] but there's no "Daher 2024" cite in the article. Could you add the missing cites to the sources section? -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 16:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind I was able to confirm that this was Daher 2019 Hezbollah: Mobilization and Power and fix the reference. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 01:49, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ActivelyDisinterested, sorry just saw this. Yes that's correct. I had copied and pasted references from other articles without copying and pasting the main sfn ref.VR (Please ping on reply) 17:18, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed party at PIA5

Hello, I'm notifying you that I have listed your name at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence#Seven proposed parties as being among the most active editors in Palestine/Israel noticeboard disputes, and I have proposed that you participate as a party to the case. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:29, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 5 updates

You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Palestine-Israel articles 5. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is The interaction of named parties in the WP:PIA topic area and examination of the WP:AE process that led to two referrals to WP:ARCA. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made:

First, the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days, until 23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC). Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on the evidence talk page, providing a reason with WP:DIFFS as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective.

Second, the evidence phase has been extended by a week, and will now close at 23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC). For the Arbitration Committee, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Standard notice: Syrian Civil War

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 Syrian Civil War and ISIL. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. 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.

As a note, per these community-authorized general sanctions, there is a one-revert rule in place for all articles related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, broadly construed. This means that an editor in this area may make no more than one revert per article per 24 hour period, unless an obvious exception applies. Please let me know if you have any questions about this. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]