User talk:AlAboud83/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your recent edit to the page The Undertaker appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. InFlamester20 (talk) 05:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

knowledge

knowledge
without knowledge,here is no life Alhanuty (talk) 15:26, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

February 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Kane (wrestler), please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. InFlamester20 (talk) 05:33, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Memory Remains"

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on The Memory Remains" requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Disavian (talk) 15:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Arab Spring. 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jeancey (talk) 20:58, 24 February 2012 (UTC) My imformation is right,saleh the yemeni former president is no longer president,now is former deputy,hadi is president and saleh regime and government is overthrown,please,so let people stop editing,and putting wrong imformation that he is still president,or i will put protection on the article

Yemen article

The thing is, he hasn't technically lost power yet. His successor still has to be sworn in. Therefore your information is not correct, YET. Jeancey (talk) 08:07, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

When I reverted your edit, he hadn't been sworn in yet. Also, I think the article might already be protected. I'm not sure why you threatened that, but yeah. It also wouldn't prevent me from editing it. Jeancey (talk) 08:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of May 2012 Homs clashes

The article May 2012 Homs clashes has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP is not a newspaper. Article is barely comprehensible. And the original author added the tags? very strange. completely unreferenced.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gtwfan52 (talk) 08:45, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of May 2012 Homs clashes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article May 2012 Homs clashes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/May 2012 Homs clashes until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Gtwfan52 (talk) 16:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Arab Spring map reframed.svg

A tag has been placed on File:Arab Spring map reframed.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:24, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Mustafa Ahmed al-Sheikh

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Mustafa Ahmed al-Sheikh. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:12, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 04:21, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Damascus

It was reported that only two districts were allegedly captured by the rebels. Midan and one other, and that was yesterday, since than the military has moved into them and fighting is ongoing at the moment so its unknown who controls what. EkoGraf (talk) 22:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay,then (Alhanuty (talk) 22:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC))

i found an article that confirms that they control at least al-midan . (Alhanuty (talk) 01:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC))


there is huge fighting and the free syrian army has taken control over neighborhoods in aleppo city .

Nomination of Battle of Aleppo(2012) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle of Aleppo(2012) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Aleppo(2012) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 00:51, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Salaheddine

Your last edit in Battle of Aleppo is a complete manipulation attempt of a source. you deliberately wrote that the rebels were in control of Salahedine when the source said exactly the contrary. This is completly against the rules of Wikipedia --DanielUmel (talk) 16:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

i already heard an neutral person in aljazerra saying there is fighting but they still control it (third time (talk) 16:54, 6 August 2012 (UTC)) .

We still go by the sources that can be provided in a page. --DanielUmel (talk) 17:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing

You have been vandalizing the page the WHOLE week. You never add anything to the page but revert and try to manipulate what the source says.

Stop it now.--DanielUmel (talk) 08:28, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

i swear that now that free syrian army stated they DIDN'T WITHDREW FROM SALAHELDINE DISTRICT ,ALJAZERRA REPORTER CONFIRMED THAT THIS A LIE FROM THE REGIME ,A PROPAGANDA WARFARE AND CHECK IT.

Stop. Reuters witnessed that rebels were retreating. I know that FSA issued a statement saying that they did not withdraw. Don't delete sourced content but add the denial.

Anyway, a rebel commander just told AFP that the Syrian Army entered Salaheddine --DanielUmel (talk) 08:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

YOU DON'T ACCUSING ME OF VANDALIZING I WAS ADDING RIGHT INFORMATION EVERYTIME ,ACTUALLY YOU WERE THE ONE VANDALIZING THAT THE REGIME REGAINED CONTROL WHICH WAS COMPLETELY FALSE BASED ON PROPAGANDA

ALJAZEERA REPORTER HAS CONFIRMED THAT THE FREE SYRIAN ARMY STILL CONTROLS SALAHEDINE,AND THAT WHAT WAS SAID THAT THE REGIME REGAINED IT WAS FALSE AND PROPAGANDA (third time (talk) 17:27, 8 August 2012 (UTC)) .

ALJAZEERA! As if anyone trusts this "news" outlet. 88.107.54.78 (talk) 16:56, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

August 2012

Welcome

Hello, Alhanuty, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! - 220 of Borg 19:15, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Salahadine

It was only one source that reported the claim that the rebels recaptured it. Since than not one other source has reported it. Not the BBC, not CNN, not the Guardian, not the Telegraph, etc. In fact, all other media outlets have continued to report it being under government control. All editors have agreed that it was most likely a rebel propaganda stunt or error on part of the LA Times. So at this point in time the information has been found to be incorrect. If you continue re-adding it based just on one vague source, despite the consensus reached by all the other editors, you will be found in violation of the POV and Verifibility rules and reported and possibly blocked. So please try and keep a neutral point of view if you want to edit on Wikipedia. Thank you. EkoGraf (talk) 23:25, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Aljazeera confirmed that there is still fighting in salaheddine with the rebels control parts of salaheddine,check it if you want (third time (talk) 23:29, 11 August 2012 (UTC)).

Yes, other editors have discussed that source too. The source talks about fighting in parts of the district which is seen as rebel attempts at regaining lost ground. However, the source does not say that they managed to regain control of any territory let alone the whole district as the LA times source claimed. So, until multiple reliable sources report that the rebels regained control it is officially under government control. Which literally all notable media outlets have been reporting for the last 3 days. EkoGraf (talk) 23:33, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

SANA

A decision on this issue was made at the start of the conflict. SANA is included for the sake of neutrality because we include all of the opposition claims as well. Both sides POV need to be presented for the sake of neutrality. A lot of opposition claims have also been found unreliable, but we still include them. EkoGraf (talk) 17:32, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

OKAY.(third time (talk) 18:13, 12 August 2012 (UTC))

listen and listen good,all what i find mostly in the Battle of Aleppo article is SANA claims ,this is considered unneutral because nobody is putting up more rebels claims ,so if this continued on for this article itself will become non-neutral .Alhanuty (talk) 16:57, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:49, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Farouk al-Sharaa

Your recent edits at the Farouk al-Sharaa article are not sourced and you added a claim that didn't even ocurred (20 August 2012). --Wüstenfuchs 16:34, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Aleppo

The source reported that the Syrian TV stated that the Syrian Army had captured the al-Dawla district. Non of the sources didn't stated that it's still rebel held neither it did confrimed that it is Army-held, however, this source must remain in the article as there is no other information about the event.

Another thing, considering the "advances" of the rebels in those two districts you added, please note also it is a claim of a one man, named Mohammed Saeed who is a rebel activist. And also you must make a dfference between "made advance" and "making advance". And also note that those claims made by Saeed "could not be independently verified" (as vast majority of rebels' claims). --Wüstenfuchs 19:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

...and the vast majority of SANA claims can not be independently verified either. حرية (talk) 16:22, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
And again nether can all rebel claims. That's why we present both points of view without discrimination. EkoGraf (talk) 16:48, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Your thoughts are requested

I’ve started a move request to change the title of the article Al-Nusra Front to Protect the Levant to Al-Nusra, per WP:commonname. Your input is appreciated. -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 00:59, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about accusing you of vandalism

I got very confused when content on my page started to stop appearing. I didn't realize you were the IP user. Luckily, it's fixed now. Two things to remember: (1) don't use the ref template (<ref...) on talk pages. (2)Always sign your posts.-- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 02:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

i got cofused too --Alhanuty (talk) 02:09, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Apology

You made a peronal attack. You accused me for no good reason and made a political epithet (pro-regime editor). Now, I did wrote everything in the article according to sources, did I? Tell me what makes me a pro-"regime" editor? You should refrain yourself from such comments in future.

--Wüstenfuchs 22:37, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I am not personally attacking you,but be neutral,because I think u said that assad's regime is less worst than the Qatari and saudi's regime, and in general your comments appear to be pro- government which shows that your biased toward the Assad regime , Be neutral,and I wasn't attacking you that all
User:Wüstenfuchs used to have a "This user supports Bashar al Assad" userbox, and was permanently blocked for edit warring in Assad's favour on Syria related articles. The only reason he is still on Wikipedia is because he begged admins to allow him back. For this person to demand an apology and claim not to be an Assad shill is unbelieveable.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.253.79 (talk • contribs)

Really I didn't knew that about wustenfuchs Alhanuty (talk) 03:10, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Although Wüstenfuchs can be biased sometimes, it's still better to argue against his specific edits or positions, rather than just say that all his contributions are biased. -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 03:31, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Lol, I never had tis box "support Assad", nonsense. --Wüstenfuchs 03:21, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

And for the IP, if he ever comes here, stop vandalising my user page and other pages related to my user account! Thank you. --Wüstenfuchs 03:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, AlAboud83. You have new messages at Futuretrillionaire's talk page.
Message added 14:53, 23 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FutureTrillionaire (talk) 14:53, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

How to change district colors on the Battle of Aleppo map

If you want to change a color of a block of neighborhood, all you have to do is to click on the block, then click on a color in the long spectrum of colors at the bottom of the screen. Hope this helps.-- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 01:57, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

thanks for the help,but in my inkscape it appears as if it is okay ,then when i upload it hear it appears like that— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alhanuty (talk • contribs)

It looks like you used the bucket to fill the Suleiman area a different color. Don't do that. Don't use the bucket. To change the color, just click on the district, then click on the olive color on the spectrum below. You're going to need to start over to do this, maybe by downloading a previous version by clicking on the older image in the File history section. -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 02:14, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

diff templates

hi Alhanuty, some diff templates you might find useful are:

One way to use diff for a single edit:

  1. go to the history page of an article
  2. click on the "prev" link of the line showing the edit you're interested in - you can think of this to mean "I want to know the difference between this version and the 'prev'ious version"
  3. check that this is the edit you're interested in
  4. if yes, then copy/paste the useful part of the URL (starting with the article name) into {{diff| ... }}
  5. replace the & by |
  6. add in label=the text you want to appear
  7. preview, double-check that you got this right by opening the link in a new tab
  8. save when everything is OK

The template page says that you can leave out the parameter names, but IMHO it's easier to leave them in. Boud (talk) 15:01, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

EkoGraf

Just to notice you, you sent a message to EkoGraf at my talk page... --Wüstenfuchs 23:55, 4 December 2012 (UTC) I was just telling him something,and future millionaire came to my page ,and the Arabic user name came to my page,what the difference Alhanuty (talk) 23:58, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

He probably didn't noticed the message you sent him, that's the problem. I don't believe EkoGraf is reading my talk page... He isn't aware of the message I'd say. --Wüstenfuchs 03:11, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay,then. Alhanuty (talk) 18:54, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Hey Alhaunty.

What do you think about the new changes on the battle of aleppo's map? Amedjay (talk) 20:05, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Without a doubt there is a change in the situation in west aleppo Alhanuty (talk) 20:36, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes and I think that if rebel cut the infantry base they will be able to advance into salahedeen and center city from west. If they do this the army is done. Do you agree? What do you think about that? Amedjay (talk) 20:43, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Map layers

On the Southern Syria map, there are multiple layers. You can move a object "above" another object by pressing the "Shift" and "PgUp" keys at the same time. Pressing "Shift" and "PgDn" moves an object below another objects. Some of the green "clouds" you've added blocked the Damascus city boundaries. If that doesn't work, you might need to copy the object that's "trapped" below and paste it at the same spot, in which case it will appear on the top layer. -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:52, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Deonis

I've reported him to Commons AN. Please comment here: [1]. -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:23, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, AlAboud83. You have new messages at Futuretrillionaire's talk page.
Message added 22:47, 18 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FutureTrillionaire (talk) 22:47, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Title change

Can you comment on this? Talk:Rif Dimashq offensive (November 2012–present)#Damascus offensive. -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 23:17, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Halfaya

(X! · talk)  · @269  ·  12:03, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, AlAboud83. You have new messages at Futuretrillionaire's talk page.
Message added 01:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FutureTrillionaire (talk) 01:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Kessab

the problem with the sourcing from the institute of study of war is exactly that: its a november edition. The page itself only shows a map of "rebel-held" territory. The source i gave (BBC) is updated as of December 4, and doesnt show rebels controlling the region of kessab (despite being near it). the writings on the map make no mention of the region of kessab being under control of rebels and the area nearest to kessab being mentioned is bdama (which is closer to jisr al-shugour). Furthermore, a recent video from the rebels themselves (dec. 26, 2012) shows them having a small presence in kassab and firing artillery at the government controlled kassab region, meaning that they dont control that area (like they do at al-bab or azaz) but are still fighing with a small presence. the source map from the institute of study of war doesnt confirm that rebels control that area by text (as they did with bdama). All other sources dont confirm that kesab is under rebel control, so yes I will change it unless there are other sources giving updates or saying otherwise. Ass711 (talk) 14:20, 6 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.222.16 (talk)

Proposed deletion of 2012-2013 Iraqi protests

The article 2012-2013 Iraqi protests has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No sources, and no notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mdann52 (talk) 13:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Syria red flag

Look, I'm syrian, and my flag represent me, And this flag represent syria , I don't were are you from , But if you see that this doesn't represent syria, this is in your view , What have done in lybia is wrong, This flag will represent syria until it change, I'm proud of my flag , and I'll not let anyone change it, Who said it doesn't represent syria anymore ? , UN ? , ASSAD ?, Revolution people ? , who are those revolution people ? , Are they a government ? ,in all of the official things in syria this flag appears, We are not proud of a flag that were put by a french people who are not from our country, Until now it represent syria, so please don't change it ,Best regards.GhiathArodaki (talk) 13:56, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

you can't decide because iit is your personal decision,syria doesn't have a particular flag due that there is two sides claiming to be the de jure governemnt of syria,

But who is the government now ?, Assad right ? , What is the official flag of syria now ? , The red, so it's our flag , not assad , It's not my personal decision , It's the truth GhiathArodaki (talk) 19:37, 15 March 2013 (UTC) ASSAD LOST CONTROL OVER THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNTRY,AND THE NATIONAL COALITION GAINED INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION AS THE SOLE LEGITIMATE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SYRIAN PEOPLE AND ALSO GAINED SYRIA CHAIR IN THE ARAB LEAGUE,SO ASSADGOV9ERNMENT IS NO LONGER THE OFFICIAL9 GOVERNMENT OF SYRIA ANYMOREAbdo45 (talk) 19:46, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Firstly , The council doesn't represent me , secondly he is still the president , and this is not our main talk , we are now talking about the flag .GhiathArodaki (talk) 20:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC) i told you wikipedia isn't a place for opinion and if you vandalize the article i will report you to an admin Abdo45 (talk) 20:57, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

What Ever ?GhiathArodaki (talk) 21:11, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Syrian Flag

Dear Alhanuty,

I have made several changes to the article about the Flag of Syria, all with constructive intentions. I made a few smal changes, added some info the intro and paragraphs 1 and 3.4 and changed the titels of paragraph 1 and 2. You may dispute some of my changes but in no way can you argue that the changes where vandalism. Yet you removed all my changes with the statement "leave it as i left it due,this is the same thing done in libya,and for george stop freakin vandalizing the article or i will report you)". "Leave it as I left it" does not sound as a valid argument.

I think changing the titels of paragraph 1 and 2 can be the only change you really object to. I made this change in an attempt to use neutral titles as I saw an ongoing dispute on the title of the first paragraph where it was alternating between "Flag used by the Assad government" and "Official Flag". I suggest reverting to my last version and changing the titels of paragraph 1 and 2 to 1 Flag used by the Assad government and 2 Flag used by the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. We can then continue the naming dispute on the articles talk page.

Renetus, (talk) 8:40, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Abdo45| 14:55, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit War

In my opinion you and GhiathArodaki are both too involved in the Syrian conflict to be neural and it would be best for both of you to stop editing this article. As a Syrian GhiathArodaki is to passionate about his standpoint and is clearly violating wikipedia rules. His contributions are mostly reverting, deleting and adding poor english language. Your (Alhanuty) edits are les disruptive but you also reverted some constructive contributions and have started threatening me if I didn't leave the article the way you left it. I have the impression that as a Kurd you strongly favour the Independence flag (to support the opposition) and are doing everything you can to represent this flag (and the opposition) as being of equal status in the name of objectivity. In the case of Lybia the green flag was a Kadhafi symbol. Because the red-white-black flag is not an Assad symbol I can understand that people object to the title "Flag used by the Assad government". I personally would prefer calling section 1 and 2, United Arab Republic flag and Independence flag as in the introduction. If GhiathArodaki (or you) would continue to violate wikipedia rules I would report that again which would probably lead to a higher sanction this time. Renetus (talk) 21:19, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Respond

My respond on this silly word https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Renetus GhiathArodaki (talk) 19:33, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Map

Thanks for the Thanks! Its a pain trying to do the front lines, a lot of it is guesswork, but "accurate guesswork" you can say. Small villages do not appear on the map, and that makes it harder to show the lines. I remember doing Libya until other users took over in late August, and made it more accurate. The problem I have trying to put front lines in is how crowded the map is. I used the Paint.NET program, and just drew the lines. Libya was easy because it was basically west vs. east. Their are pockets in southern Syria. If anything, hopefully the news can get more out of what is going on, and we can get a clearer line on what is actually the case. I used the template image with all the cities, and took a 1000px of that (I went into the edit, and made the width 1000px, and previewed it, then took a screenshot, "prt sc") There has yet to be change since then, but like I said, when it becomes clearer what is happening, it may be used. —SPESH531Other 16:07, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

March 2013

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Flag of Syria. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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.  Bbb23 (talk) 16:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

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).

AlAboud83 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here excuse me Admin Bbb23 with all due respect,but i think that you have mistakenly blocked me from editing, i didn't edit war the article it is GhiathArodaki who is edit warring the article, and he breaching a consensus in the article that we use the word flag for both the government and the opposition,a i was only reverting the vandalism of GhiathArodaki with the help of user Renetus who was helping me to revert ghiath vandalism and i never breached the 3 edit rule and we made a discussion to end this, ghiath the the only one who wants the red flag to be called official,which shows a biased view that assads government is the legitimate government of syria,which it is no longer that,now the case of syria is like the case that we reached in libya,and for me i all other users agree to that word flag is to be used for both sides and please can you unblock me i never disagreed with any concensusAlhanuty (talk) 17:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Regardless, you were edit warring; content disputes are not WP:VANDALISM, so it was required for all parties not to edit war; those who were, you included, were blocked t stop the edit war. --jpgordon::==( o ) 18:20, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

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.

(edit conflict): There seems to be clear reverts by you at 13:44, 18:06, 20:23, and 12:39. This would indeed be a violation of our 3RR policy. I'm not sure I see vandalism; can you explain why his edits fall into that category? Kuru (talk) 18:22, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

i think this maybe for time difference Alhanuty (talk) 18:26, 23 March 2013 (UTC) and it didn't happen in 24 hours i wasn't edit warring at all i respected the third edit rule and i never made the forth one, can you unblock me,ghiath breached a concensus,i didn't and he was editwarring and vandalizing the article,and i never intended any edit warring at all, and i respected the rule,and even another user renetus was helping me,it is unjust to blocka person who was reverting vandalism Alhanuty (talk) 18:28, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

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).

AlAboud83 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here i wasn't edit warring at all i respected the third edit rule and i never made the forth one, can you unblock me,ghiath breached a concensus,i didn't and he was editwarring and vandalizing the article,and i never intended any edit warring at all, and i respected the rule,and even another user renetus was helping me,it is unjust to blocka person who was reverting vandalismAlhanuty (talk) 18:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As I noted above, the edits are within 24 hours. I do not see how the other editor's edits were vandalism; have you looked at WP:VAND? Kuru (talk) 18:56, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

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.

it didn't happen in 24 hours it was only 3 edits per day only Alhanuty (talk) 19:11, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

(1) two consecutive edits at 13:44 and 13:49 on March 22; (2) 18:06 on March 22; (3) 20:23 on March 22; (4) 12:39 on March 23.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:20, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Besides which, you're not blocked for WP:3RR, you're blocked for edit warring. --jpgordon::==( o ) 19:22, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I didn't see until after I posted the 4 reverts that Kuru already laid this out for you above. What is it that you don't understand?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:23, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

i wasn't edit warring ,i went with the concensus that was agreed on,ghiath didn't and he boldly continued to edit war it. even through a consensus was agreed,i was reverting ghaith vandalism, ghiath is trying to to make the article biased , and i wish if you could unblock me,i didn't edit war,i was revert ghaith vandalism,and the user renetus was helping me in reverting the vandalism,and renetus DIDN'T GOT BLOCKED,ghaith was the only one who should have got blocked Alhanuty (talk) 19:34, 23 March 2013 (UTC) and i even warned him to stop the edit warring Alhanuty (talk) 19:38, 23 March 2013 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:GhiathArodaki#edit_warring

Reverting to what you believe is a consensus is essentially a content dispute and is considered edit warring. The exemption for vandalism is generally hard to claim. The alleged vandalism has to be obvious on its face. For example, if someone was putting in profanity or nonsense in an article, that would be clear vandalism. In this instance, however, the edits were not obvious vandalism. You felt that the other editor was biased in favor of the Syrian government. The other editor felt you were biased in favor of the opposition. Not only a content dispute but a political and personal dispute. You're going to have to take responsibility for your own behavior in this incident. Whether the other editor was "worse" than you or whether their edits were more disruptive than yours is not a debate you should be having at this juncture. You edit-warred. You violated 3RR. You were blocked. Either sit out your block, take a break and reflect; or focus on your conduct, Wikipedia policy, and acknowledge what part you played in this. It's up to you.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:00, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

so you won't unblock me ,and why didn't you warn me before i got blocked,and i was reverting and edit in good faith.Alhanuty (talk) 20:10, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

You reported the other editor for edit warring a week ago. That plus the ongoing history eliminates any need for a warning. In addition, a warning is not required per policy.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:22, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

What if ghiath edit wars the article again Alhanuty (talk) 02:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

A tip for the future

Again thanks about the map. Anyway, I was looking at your past contributions, and you seem to move on an impulse. Like when you changed the map on Syrian civil war, I would have both in my opinion, but it is the communities decision. Bring discussions to the talk pages on each article, not everything obviously. I used to act on impulse when I first started contributing, and that got a lot of "edit warring's" and vandalism comments. Take it slow, sometimes you have to wait. I made the map with the front lines in Syria similar to that of the one I made in Libya, it took a few months before it was being used. I brought up the possible usage of the map, and the message I got was somewhat like this "because there are not any little villages shown under control from the FSA or Assad, the frontlines are guesswork." That was true. I hope it does not get used until more sources appear on the situations near the front lines. If an edit I do gets reverted, I will bring it to the talk page to discuss. Any further tips you need, ask me or any administrator (admins are probably better), and follow them, they could help you in the future. Hope this all helps.—SPESH531Other 02:15, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

ohh,then tell futuretrillionaire that that was a mistake , i can't say it to him because i was blocked today. Alhanuty (talk) 02:21, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Nothing I can say will change the decision of you being blocked for 24 hours, I have been in those 3Revert Rules three times, blocked once, over some Palestine debate on why it wasn't a state, something like that, I asked for an unblock, did not get it, and I waited it out, at least you did not get 72 hours like your "enemy" did, be happy with that. (Sorry if that was rude, it's 2 in the morning where I am, night!)—SPESH531Other 06:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Changes to the infobox

A few editors added Israel and other parties to the infobox without any consensus whatsoever. This is completely against Wikipedia policies. Can you please remove it? I think I might have already used my revert for the day. (People are now only allowed to revert the article once every 24 hours)--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 21:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

i didn't believe that things got out of control,that they limited reverts to one, i agree with you,israel isn't involved and it isn't neither supporting any side and for bombing syrian territory this happened many of times way before the uprising and mentioning border clashes like the ones in jordon and iraq is overweighted alot Alhanuty (talk) 21:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. EkoGraf (talk) 14:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Flag of Syria

Sorry, I inadvertently overwrote your edit, but the software didn't give me a warning. I was trying to add a tag to Dn9ahx's edit, which I thought was the latest version. AnonMoos (talk) 20:18, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Syria infobox

Consider presenting your arguments on the talk page before making any further reverts. Thanks. - ☣Tourbillon A ? 20:27, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

You continue to revert without any discussion, which constitutes vandalism. Your personal opinion goes against what has already been agreed by other users, so please stop doing it. - ☣Tourbillon A ? 06:28, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism,there is no consensus ,I read the discussion 5-5,so there is no agreement,when the majority agrees then we will talk Alhanuty (talk) 00:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

There is no consensus to remove the infobox using Syrian Arab Republic symbols. Instead of counting votes, read what is actually written there. - ☣Tourbillon A ? 06:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I read it,I am not say remove it, I am saying add the green one of the national coalition too,that's it Alhanuty (talk) 00:19, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

And put both of them down after representing the main info of syria,or in the political section,that what was done in the libyan case,and U.N Seat argument is invalid,because in the libyan case we added both of the gaddafi and the rebel flag before the NTC got libya's chair in the U.N Alhanuty (talk) 00:22, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Daraa Governorate clashes (2011-2013), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nawa (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) 09:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Damascus Offensive

I'm sorry but i dont know who to report that kind of thing to. its obvious its just putting regime propaganda on the page and it seems pointless for them not to wait for impartial RS - thats what they're like i guess. sorry to just put my head in the sand kind of thing. Sayerslle (talk) 23:38, 8 April 2013 (UTC) to the edit war noticeboard Alhanuty (talk) 23:53, 8 April 2013 (UTC) write a report against him that he reverted more than five times

Oh! So the green flag isn't used by a specific group ?,And the red is not the flag of syria ? , It is just a view , you happy now what was wrote on the sections ? , congratulations you and your opposition , why don't you read some news ? , jabhat al-nusra announced that it made Islamic country in Iraq and Syria , the flag was put , and they are claiming to be the government , Your Kurds put their Flag of Kurdistan with the sun one , and claim they are controlling places like hasaka ,and don't tell me the stupid case of lybia , there all of opposition used the kingdom area flag , but in my country , 3/4 of the opposition using this flag as a symbol , while the others are just stupids , doesn't know anything , they use it as an official thing , and the lied and believed themself , actually i musn't claim you as an opposition in syria , i hope you ask me why .GhiathArodaki (talk) 05:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

during the arab summit,the syrian coalition used The green flag

Are you syrian ? , This my first question , second , what does the arab summit means ? , What do you compare , UN or Arab League , Who is the government now ? , Syrian coalition using this only as a symbol not official flag of syria , your not the one who say what is the official flag of syria , you don't like the red one , that is your problem , but the red one is the used now in the country , coalition isn't a government yet , and there is still a government in syria , you know , not 2 government are claiming to be official , but four , Kurdistan people, Jbhat al-nusra , opposition and the current government, Let us take things on real , coalition isn't the official one , i don't care what a little country like Qatar says , as it isn't the leader of syria or something , i care of what UN says , UN says Bashar the president , so bashar is the president , Stop looking at dreams and look at the truth .GhiathArodaki (talk) 16:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, AlAboud83. You have new messages at Futuretrillionaire's talk page.
Message added 21:26, 13 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FutureTrillionaire (talk) 21:26, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Battle of Khan al-Assad

Hi, I think their is a misunderstanding because i created the Battle of Khan al-Assad but you just moved it to a new article with the exact same title and with my edits and references. It's no big deal but i would prefer if you could keep the original article that i created rather than just keeping it as a page to go to your article. Thanks for that/.Mehrah13 (talk 21:29, 28 April 2013

the name of the area is khan al-assal Alhanuty (talk) 12:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

just wanted to correct the name of the article Alhanuty (talk) 12:11, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Ways to improve Timeline of the Syrian civil war (from May 2013)

Hi, I'm Mr. Stradivarius. Alhanuty, thanks for creating Timeline of the Syrian civil war (from May 2013)!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Nice work creating this article. It would be great if you could use citation templates for your references as well, so that the article won't suffer from link rot. Let me know if you need any pointers. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 14:56, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 14:56, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bayda massacre

The article Bayda massacre has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTNEWS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ducknish (talk) 20:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Cleaned up the article, as you requested, as well as some 3-4 other articles in the last few days that were highly neglected. EkoGraf (talk) 23:49, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Alhanuty (talk) 00:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Renamed the article and added information on Baniyas since the two events are connected. EkoGraf (talk) 17:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Israel in the infobox

Can you help? Israel and the other countries should not be added to the infobox because there is no consensus in the talk page to do so. However, Baboon reverted my removal, and I've already used my 1 revert. Can you undo his revert? Thanks.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 16:29, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Qusayr situation

The 40-60 percent are reports confirmed by the rebels themselves, not the government. I didn't include the government claim because its unreliable. So, 40-60 is confirmed by rebel sources, one of them actually being the Qusayr opposition media center, the main rebel propaganda arm in Qusayr. EkoGraf (talk) 15:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC) But the situation is still foggy,and unclear Alhanuty (talk) 15:53, 24 May 2013 (UTC) It will be better if we wait till it becomes certain clear Alhanuty (talk) 15:53, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Battle of Darayya (2012–present)

In this edit to Battle of Darayya (2012–present), you accused User:Pug6666 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) of being User:Deonis2012 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). No such user as Deonis2012 exists. Please explain.--Auric talk 00:42, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I mean the Ip
92.113.115.85,he is a sock puppet to a famous sock master Deonis2012, and investigiate him by an IP tracker Alhanuty (talk) 00:46, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Here is deonis 2012 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deonis_2012,Alhanuty (talk) 00:48, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying. That space made all the difference. I have reported him.--Auric talk 00:54, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Unless you have proof you can't just make accusations like this. I simply edited after the ip 92.113.115.85 Pug6666 01:42, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I didn't mean you pug6666,I meant the sockpuppet,but I should have pointed out that it was the ip Alhanuty (talk) 13:44, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Hama offensive

Because the source provided did not indicate any general rebel offensive in an attempt to capture the eastern part of the province. What the source did say is only about a rebel diversionary attack on 25 April and in Hama city only, not the whole province. However, later sources do point to a general Army offensive to shell and than attack and capture Halfaya and that other town, which than did result in a further rebel attempted takeover of villages in the eastern part of the province as retaliation. EkoGraf (talk) 21:11, 26 May 2013 (UTC) The government attack was a retaliation for the rebel attack in hama city especially the Tariq halab Alhanuty (talk) 21:13, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, and that's why we put info on that in the background. Because the reason for the start of military operations against Halfaya and others was that rebel attack in Hama city 25-26 April. But the offensive operations themselves started on 10 May with the commencement of shelling on Halfaya. And that rebel attack in Hama city in late April was by no means part of a larger offensive. EkoGraf (talk) 22:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Israel in infobox (again)

Someone added Israel to the infobox again without any consensus. Can you please remove it? --FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Information icon Welcome, and thank you for contributing the page ألكسندر رسل وب to Wikipedia. While you have added the page to the English version of Wikipedia, the article is not in English. We invite you to translate it into English. It currently has been listed at Pages Needing Translation, but if it is not translated within two weeks, the article will be listed for deletion. Thank you. Way2veers 20:00, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

The only text translated as "Muhammad Alexander Russell Webb". As such, I redirected it to Alexander Russell Webb.--Auric talk 20:23, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Reply

I didn't say you were imposing your point of view, I said you were writing in your point of view something that was contradictory to the source. EkoGraf (talk) 18:34, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AlAboud83/Archive_1&oldid=1139305878"