User talk:Stephan rostie
Hello, Stephan rostie, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.
- Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
- Check out some of these pages:
- If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 07:55, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
- Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
- In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
- Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
- Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like
<ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing). - In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
- If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:
==References==
{{Reflist}}
March 2023[edit]
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
I have no opinion on the content. I just happened to notice the reverting. Onorem (talk) 22:58, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, i got it. But please check @Horse Eye's Back because he started it by disturbing the article with no argument. Stephan rostie (talk) 23:05, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
You also need to read wp:bludgeon. Slatersteven (talk) 16:50, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
You might also want to read wp:spa. Slatersteven (talk) 16:59, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
You also need to read WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Slatersteven (talk) 17:29, 18 March 2023 (UTC) You need to read wp:agf and wp:npa, to accuse users of disruption because you do not like their edits is not a good route to editing here. Slatersteven (talk) 12:35, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- No i am accusing them of disruptive editing because they ignored the consensus reached in the talks page between I and @Matt Smith (back when it was only I and him) without even bothering themselves to join or probably even see the talks. Stephan rostie (talk) 12:42, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- That is an assumption of bad faith, they are not required to accept your (or Matt Smith's reasons). Nor is silence agreement, they may have been waiting to see what you wrote (or (as I did) not even catch your talk page comment, as many users watch many pages, they do not concentrate on single articles or even topics). Also I am unsure MAtt agreed with you, as they say "The status of Taiwan (island) is still in dispute and is not internationally recognized as a part of China. Therefore, it's different from the other case you mentioned. ", I see no comment where they alter that view. So it may well be no one took part as they assumed Matts objection meant you would not assume you had consensus. In addition, there is a least one other objection (along the same lines) before you make your edit. Slatersteven (talk) 13:11, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
You should also not alter your posts, after they have been replied to. Slatersteven (talk) 13:19, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Is that a wikipedia policy or advice ? Stephan rostie (talk) 13:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Offical advice WP:REFACTOR. Slatersteven (talk) 13:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Okay got it Stephan rostie (talk) 13:48, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Slatersteven, pointing to an informal help page as "official advice" is a bit questionable. Stephan rostie may be looking for the "Editing others' comments" and "Editing own comments" sections of the talk page guideline. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:51, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
- Offical advice WP:REFACTOR. Slatersteven (talk) 13:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Hacked account[edit]
No my account has not been hacked, and that might tell you something (read wp:agf). Slatersteven (talk) 13:44, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- Okay 👍 Stephan rostie (talk) 13:47, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Arab–Israeli conflict[edit]
You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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 special powers 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 practice;
- 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. Prolog (talk) 16:10, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Russo-Ukrainian War[edit]
You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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 special powers 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 practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
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. Prolog (talk) 16:10, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
| 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 Russo-Ukrainian war. 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. |
Please note that only extended-confirmed users are allowed to make edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict or the Russo-Ukrainian War. Prolog (talk) 16:10, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
October 2023[edit]
Please refrain from using talk pages for general discussion of this or other topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See the talk page guidelines for more information. Thank you. Jeppiz (talk) 22:12, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Notice of Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard discussion[edit]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Stephan rostie. Thank you. BilledMammal (talk) 22:11, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)