User talk:Solarsilk1000

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

331dot (talk) 19:07, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi Solarsilk1000! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

I've noticed that you've expressed an interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Unfortunately, due to a history of conflict and disruptive editing it has been designated a contentious topic and is subject to some strict rules.

The rule that affects you most as a new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to the Arab–Israel conflict, including discussing articles on talk pages, unless you are logged into an account and that account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits.

This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.

The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to you being blocked from editing.

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

Happy editing! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish:

I made two post on the talk pages, if that not ok? Solarsilk1000 (talk) 19:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the above messages. In short, you are not permitted to make edits about the Israel-Arab conflict until your account is extended-confirmed (30 days old with 500 edits). 331dot (talk) 19:39, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for clarificiation but seems draconian to restrict someone just because we are new. What happen to free for everyone to edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solarsilk1000 (talk • contribs)

"Free to edit" does not mean "anyone can do anything they wish without restrictions or limitations". As you can imagine, there are strong feelings on each side of the conflict, and even experienced users have difficulty setting their views and passion aside to collaborate with others in how best to summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic. These rules are not arbitrary, but based on experience and reached after much discussion. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict will not be solved here, we're focused on improving this project. 331dot (talk) 19:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder, please confine your editing in the PIA topic area to the making of edit requests only, thanks. Selfstudier (talk) 18:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Selfstudier do not presume to lecture me. Your reputation from editing and deleting others posts is well known.Solarsilk1000 (talk) 19:34, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this a final warning. I will impose an Arbitration enforcement block on you if you persist in violating the 30/500 restriction on editing about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 331dot (talk) 19:39, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Jerusalem page does not have the 30/500 restriction.

It states that you can only edit once Solarsilk1000 (talk) 20:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well of course it does. And your personal attack on 331dot violates the CTOP requirement. Ima block you 24 for personal attacks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:23, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read it all. If you are extended-confirmed. Please stop attacking editors who tell you that. Acroterion (talk) 20:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Acroterion (talk) 20:23, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, @Acroterion:, already past final warning. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am the one being attacked.Solarsilk1000 (talk) 20:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This will be a regular block. Obviously, you are not temperamentally suited to editing Wikipedia, let alone in a CTOP area. Longer blocks may be in store as I do not think you will stop -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that 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 ~~~~}}. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:27, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Endorsed. Solarsilk1000, attacking editors who advise you of topic sanctions is an efficient way to lose editing privileges. Acroterion (talk) 20:28, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To the racist terrorist supporters Selfstudier and Actorean, I knew you would take the bait and engage in administrator abuse.

This will be going to the higher ups as well as outside notice boardfs

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you believe that 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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 20:36, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And now you've earned an indefinite block for personal attacks. If you abuse this talkpage again you'll lose access to it too. Acroterion (talk) 20:37, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your statement about "taking the bait" makes nonsense of your unblock request. You were deliberately attacking others to evoke the response you received. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Solarsilk1000 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was blocked for telling other editors to stop removing my posts on a talk page. Instead of acting in a respetful manner . Administrator Actoreon blocked me out of mailice. This administration and self studies should be banned.

Decline reason:

There's no point in listening to you. I've revoked TPA. Bbb23 (talk) 20:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Bbb23, my grandfather suggested I do a deeper dive. You blocked this user back in 2013, when they were User:MagicKirin11, and a bunch of others of course. Acroterion, Selfstudier, Deepfriedokra, can you imagine doing this for almost two decades? It's...it's longer than most marriages! Drmies (talk) 03:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it had an LTA feel to it. And the "I'm the one being attacked," brings someone special to mind.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 03:09, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: Hey! -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 03:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. 331dot (talk) 08:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User should reread User talk:MagicKirin11#Wikipedia is not a political advocacy platform as it still holds true. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #98277

FWIW. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]