User talk:Wakari07/Arch3

August 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Crimean Bridge (Crimea). 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.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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 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 engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:52, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Again, I'm not edit warring. Please read up on WP:BRD. Wakari07 (talk) 11:15, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for spelling out arguments on Talk:Crimean Bridge (Crimea). Wakari07 (talk) 13:06, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Alert

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 recently shown interest in Eastern Europe. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. 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.

Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:52, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for this notification/alert. Also, re: on your user page question: the blood type parameter serves to distinguish between hot and cold blooded, red and blue blooded, good and bad blooded users :=p Wakari07 (talk) 11:22, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Infrabel logo color (160px) .jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Infrabel logo color (160px) .jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Somewhat pro-Russian activism done by user:Wakari07

Hi there, I have noticed that you keep reverting some of my edits regarding recent illness that happened in Salisbury. There is no evidence that this was done by Russia or whether it was an actual Novichok poisoning or not. Nevertheless it is important to mention that the police in Hazmat suits are deployed in the area due to concerns of past 2 poisonings. Several articles mention there are tensions due to this. I have noticed you keep removing the sentencing of Novichok and Skripal connections from the recent events. Please take a time to consider this removes the most important factor of the event and somewhat misinforms people on the recent case. Marjdabi (talk) 21:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Did you somewhat inform GCHQ and the CIA? Wakari07 (talk) 21:58, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

ANI notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wakari07. Marjdabi (talk) 22:02, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Ahvaz National Resistance for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ahvaz National Resistance 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/Ahvaz National Resistance until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 notice from the top of the article. Fatemi ♪ 18:28, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Personal attacks

This diff where you accuse me of vandalism (breaking a ref by mistake would not be vandalism, nor does it seem this even happened per my check) - or saying a different user has a "your preferred terrorist agency " is not cool. Far from cool. Please explain why I should not report this rather serious personal attack. Icewhiz (talk) 00:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

You should report whatever you feel the need to report, even admit you're on the same mission as the user you're defending. But you're right on the "link breaking" edit, that was not yours. My mistake, apologies for that. Wakari07 (talk) 03:18, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Mission? What mission? Whom exactly am I defending? Icewhiz (talk) 06:55, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

That "different user", Mardjabi, remember? You threaten me here to report me on ANI for what I wrote on ANI... where I argued that the guy used social media and tabloid sources to push the unverified (and arguably unverifiable) claims of one terrorist agency over another. Maybe those discussions were somewhat heated. Wakari07 (talk) 18:45, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Timeline of young people's rights in France for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Timeline of young people's rights in France 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/Timeline of young people's rights in France until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 notice from the top of the article. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:00, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Wakari07. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

edit war

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Waskerton (talk) 03:24, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

All we have to do is Keep Talking. Wakari07 (talk) 03:38, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bernardo Bertolucci, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vanity Fair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Good bot. Now hush. Wakari07 (talk) 18:47, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from here. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed and I paraphrased some. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:41, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

This reminds me that I should put a key logger on my devices. Now I can't argue. Wakari07 (talk) 04:53, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. The list-like material is okay to copy, but the surrounding prose is not. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 05:34, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. Wakari07 (talk) 09:51, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brussels bombings, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Belga (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Fixed. Wakari07 (talk) 09:48, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Suspicion

Hi, I suspect that Waskerton, Flickotown and Wildcursive are actually one person. The editing style, the language use, and the focus is very similar. Also see diff. Best, Tobby72 (talk) 18:21, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback and sorry for the late reply. I had a "long break" from Wikipedia and I'm happy not to cross their path for the moment. Cheers and keep up the good editing! Wakari07 (talk) 00:32, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Read all the sources before removing material for being unsourced please. You are damaging peoples work.

In the article 2019 Beirut drone crashes I have noticed you removed some content for being unsourced, they are actually sourced if you read all the sources. Just because the source isn't cited after each sentence doesn't mean it's unsourced. Stop this disruptive behavior on your future edits please, thanks. Bill497 (talk) 07:07, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

You yourself agree Debkafile emptied its article after publication. What about using a private Twitter account as primary source? And who is soshals.com? I only want clear, valid NPOV verifiable references. Thank you. Wakari07 (talk) 07:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Maybe you mean the "info" about alleged threats "to punish Israel for the attack on the next day"? That didn't stand the test, neither before nor even after Nasrallah speeched. What are you talking about exactly? I opened a section on the article's talk page about the reportedly-reported-by-Hezbollah "3 people injured". You're welcome to add a meaningful argument here or there. Wakari07 (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Head-exploding harassment

Your recent legal riddle really made me think. I consulted Wikipedia's searchbox for precedent, and found "white supremacist" has never been noted in the same article as "drone" (not even the innocent recreational kind), much less in conjuction. So it's most likely whoever attacks you in such a heinous and hypothetical manner will have framed white supremacists.

Thank you, I feel much safer now. Wishing you all the best too :-)

And who wants to see white supremacism fall, routinely uses drones, stages disinformation campaigns, experiments with psychoactives, pretend they don't, blend into scenery and think they're personally better than you?

If you replace "fall" with "rule", then I consider this a rhetorical question. Begging for your understanding.

Bingo. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:45, August 27, 2019 (UTC)

LOL, discovering this article. "[W]hat happens when pastiche and irony exhaust themselves as aesthetics" sounds comforting though. I hope I got your point ;-) Wakari07 (talk) 12:31, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm processing your fall-to-rule point, but not quite understanding it yet. Not asking for a hint, just more time. I saw two (presumably piloted) helicopters come close to clipping each other last night by my house, but catastrophe was averted...for now. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:12, August 27, 2019 (UTC)

What a coincidence. This afternoon I faced two barking aggressive attack dogs with their skinhead-type owner threatening to "punch out my teeth", but the dogs were leashed and muzzled... for now. Wakari07 (talk) 23:20, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Call me Encyclopedia Brown, but the only thing more suspicious than a barking muzzled dog is two of them. At least their leashes worked as intended. I've had one tooth knocked out by a bald white dude (for non-racial reasons) and it was no picnic, but not nearly as bad as the one bad dog bite I've had.

If I had to choose between a lone wolf with Castle Wolfenstein delusions blowing my head off and a pack of socially-acceptable "natural" predators hamstringing and disemboweling me ass-first, I'd go with Robo-Hitler as the lesser of two evils, I think. How about you? InedibleHulk (talk) 00:27, August 28, 2019 (UTC)

Maybe both can be avoided in the future while still enjoying some kind of life. I've never been attacked by a dog yet – and cross fingers that my luck lasts – but I can still feel the pain of having been mauled by massive ignorance. It should be man over machine. That's civilization's ultimate challenge, summarizing the Three Laws of Robotics as I understand it now. When we'll have tamed the Algorithm, one day, we shall live in peace (even if there's reason to be sceptical about Peace for our time). For now, wishing you a good night's sleep, and constructive dreams about all the projects you may have, in whatever timezone you are. Wakari07 (talk) 01:50, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, brother. Nobody's ever told me constructive dreaming was an option, let alone blew hot air beneath my ethereal wings. I'll see what I can do about bringing shorn white sheeple and the Big Bad Wolf together against our common foe tomorrow, the way the one true god intended: Ideally! InedibleHulk (talk) 02:26, August 28, 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome. It's also known as active imagination, dhyana or dreamwork. It can only function with previous integration of aether in the own scientific paradigm. So now I know what you know and you know what I know. Again, all the best! Wakari07 (talk) 14:27, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Baring Vostok Capital Partners, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Commercial Court (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:35, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Just like the bot, trying to be helpful. Even if talking to AI. Wakari07 (talk) 10:06, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Get some brain and humility instead of stubborness

You admitted in the summary you did not know how to properly formulate what u did on the Current Events portal today's entry. And did you even read the source you linked? The Guardian states clearly in the link you provided it happened on Sunday 6 October. And yet u apparently did not see just a little bit down on the portal that previous day is topped with this exactly same news with exactly the same link. Someone just formulated it a little bit differently. And still you revert this your edit... My god — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.114.243 (talk) 12:05, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

This happened on Monday on the ground. You may read the source and think for yourself: 11 p.m. EST is the day after in Syria and Turkey. Wakari07 (talk) 12:11, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Lol. Even so if you wanna edit war then you should remove this from the previous day. But yea looks like u are so excited u wanna stick this everywhere and most importantly on the top! I do not agree as there are many local times etc. lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.114.243 (talk) 12:14, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Of course the announcement happened on Sunday in the US. But, simultaneously, for Turkey and the Kurdish-led forces, it happened on Monday. The source, published on Monday, contains additional info sourced on Monday. This is what I added: that the withdrawal on the ground, in Syria, reportedly took place. On Monday. We need just a little bit of a constructive attitude to figure this out. Wakari07 (talk) 18:20, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

You are required to WP:SIGN your posts. Per WP:REDACT, you can not simply edit your own comments after they have been answered. Also, for heaven's sake, please avoid gratuitous references to "your god". On being excited: I reverted [1] one of your deletions, while you deleted info three times [2][3][4] — Please read up on WP:3RR. Wakari07 (talk) 18:20, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

"Lol" is one argument, your blocklog is another. Wakari07 (talk) 18:20, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

I was deleting because earlier someone else had written that the White House issued a statement which in the source is explicitly mentioned on Sunday. You was using the same link. I have no god. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.114.243 (talk) 02:53, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

So please do not suggest I have some god. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.114.243 (talk) 02:55, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Wonderful. But be careful with the mushrooms and also please sign your talk page posts. Wakari07 (talk) 05:36, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Ah thank u. :) 83.11.114.243 (talk) 15:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2019 murders in Germany

A tag has been placed on Category:2019 murders in Germany requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:14, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Murder in Saxony-Anhalt

A tag has been placed on Category:Murder in Saxony-Anhalt requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Help!

I had posted a request on talk page of Shamsheer Vayalil to help in restoring information from an archived source. Could you help in extracting that information from archived source, because I don't know how to do this. Please visit "Stevie Awards 2011" on Talk: Shamsheer Vayalil for more details. Thanks. (223.230.137.155 (talk) 12:07, 11 December 2019 (UTC))

My mom told me to be careful with strangers. Wakari07 (talk) 15:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

• Hi,

Everyone on Wikipedia are strangers to one another.On Wikipedia if one user is not capable to make any edit he/she ask other fellow user for help. But no worries if your mom told you to be careful with strangers then you must follow her advice because mom is always right ✔. Thanks. (223.230.137.155 (talk) 16:14, 11 December 2019 (UTC))

• I think your post on Talk:Shamsheer Vayalil about me is totally wrong. I haven't posted request on other users talk pages except you. I'm sure that's not me.

Thanks. (223.230.137.155 (talk) 16:27, 11 December 2019 (UTC))

I was indeed wrong. 4 ≠ 3. My apologies, corrected. Bye. Wakari07 (talk) 16:46, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry also that I was rude in saying bye. Meanwhile, I found 67 different IP addresses all with the same single-purposed interest and language as yours. Replying your request: I'm afraid the Stevie Awards are not notable enough since they can be bought for money. You seem to be fond of Dr. Shamsheer. Why don't you create an account? Wakari07 (talk) 19:59, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

• I don't understand why you thought,that I want to destruct Dr. Shamsheer's article. I'm very fond of him and only want to edit or modify his article only. If editing a particular article is considered as vandalism, then I think I should quit editing Wikipedia because anyone can accuse me as a culprit on the "talk page" of Dr. Shamsheer's article without "any proof".To be very clear I didn't ask to "unpack archive" for making money or to extract profits from it, but only and only for betterment of the article. My apologies I troubled you. 😓😓😓

Thanks. (223.230.139.84 (talk) 00:32, 12 December 2019 (UTC))

OK, I think I understand now why you don't create a user name. We both want better articles. Keep up the learning curve! Wakari07 (talk) 06:34, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

• I'm just 14 years old and I edit Wikipedia just for gaining knowledge and for improving Wikipedia articles. If you think I would misuse the "archived source" for making any money or for any advertisement then I feel sorry for your thought. I request you to add about the "Stevie Awards 2011"(he was also an awardee) in Shamsheer Vayalil's article from archived source because I don't know to extract any information from archived source.

Thanks. (223.230.135.74 (talk) 11:28, 12 December 2019 (UTC))

I appreciate your wish to contribute. However, in this case, as I told you here and on the article talk page, I feel that this award lacks WP:Notability. I will add that nothing is known about who published the source document, meaning it could possibly be forged, so a violation of WP:Verifiability and WP:Sources. So, sorry, but I can't and won't help you with this request. Please continue discussion on the relevant talk page. Wakari07 (talk) 11:41, 12 December 2019 (UTC)