User talk:Steven1991

Welcome!

Hello, Steven1991! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Doug Weller talk 10:35, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Regressive left

You need to read WP:VERIFY and WP:RS as well as WP:NOR. Many new editors have the same problem. However, is this your first account? You seem to have a good knowledge of inline citations. If you wish to discuss your edit, please use the article talk page so others can participate. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 10:37, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and editing logged out to evade scrutiny, as you did at Regressive left. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bishonen | talk 12:05, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Hello. Sorry you're having issues with adding images to 2019 Hong Kong anti-extradition bill protests. We've been having some issues with a persistent vandal. I've made a change which will hopefully be good for the rest of today - about 4 hours - please take the opportunity to add some images. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to add images, now's a good time. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:36, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Erroneous captions to 2 of your images on the St Andrews Cathedral page of Wikipedia

You have uploaded two photographs you have taken onto the St Andrews Cathedral page of Wikipedia. Both feature the Tower of St Rule's along with what you call St Rule's "western turrets". This is not correct. What you call "western turrets" is, in fact, the (remains of) the eastern wall of the (later) sanctuary. The parallax caused by the angle of your photos may have misled you. My source? Cruden, Stuart (1950), St Andrews Cathedral - Official Guide, Edinburgh: Her Majesty's Statioery Office, ISBN 0-11-490696-3. I guess any more recent guidebook with a decent map of the site would do, but Cruden's two maps and photo no. 4 seem definitive. I don't know whether you can correct your errors (if not you, who can?) but if they aren't corrected soon I shall raise the matter on the Talk page of 'St Andrews Cathedral'. ShropshirePilgrim (talk) 09:44, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind correcting them for me then? Steven1991 (talk) 03:15, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the captions as you request. Unfortunately, the actual file title to one of them mentions the supposed "St Rule's Western turrets" and its image shows the deceptive parallax which might lead the viewer to accept the notion that the "turrets" (of the Eastern wall of the later Cathedral are actually in line with the axis of St Rule's Church, when your other picture shows plainly that they are not. I know of no way that the file's title (as opposed to its description or caption) can be altered/edited. If you know of a way, it should be corrected to avoid any further confusion. ShropshirePilgrim (talk) 12:13, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 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.

You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Regressive left, you may be blocked from editing. Your edits do not conform to WP:RS and WP:WEIGHT. Do not use opinion pieces or op-eds unless you WP:ATTRIBUTE that opinion to the author. Do not try to connect two separate issues (e.g., regressive left and Gal Gadot) unless the secondary sources make that explicit connection (cf WP:SYNTH). EvergreenFir (talk) 18:58, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop censoring anything you don't like using technical excuses. You are selecting targeting people who add content that points out critical facts you are unwilling to acknowledge. You are abusing your power as an established Wikipedia editor to control narratives on the largest global online encyclopedia. Steven1991 (talk) 19:01, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

selectively targeting* Steven1991 (talk) 19:03, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is your final warning to cease your disruptive editing. also see WP:NPA and WP:AGF. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:45, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are abusing your power to make threats towards good-faith editors. Please inform me what you consider as "disruptive". Just because the content is what you don't agree with, it does not mean it is "disruptive". Steven1991 (talk) 22:52, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By virtue of WP:AGF, you are not supposed to assume that I was making the edits in bad faith. Steven1991 (talk) 22:52, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Blocks should not be punitive

[edit source]

See also: Wikipedia:Sanctions against editors should not be punitive

Shortcuts

WP:BLOCKNOTPUNITIVE

WP:NOPUNISH

Blocks should not be used:

to retaliate;

to disparage;

to punish; or

if there is no current conduct issue of concern." Steven1991 (talk) 22:53, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You continue to make disruptive edits, thus a block is preventative. I was clear in the warning that you're engaging in WP:SYNTH, not using proper sources, adding inappropriate content (WP:COATRACK), pushing a POV, and more. Engage on the talk pages. If you continue editing these articles without first improving your understanding of our requirements and without establishing WP:CONSENSUS, I will block you. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:58, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain to me which part(s) of the content added by me was/were "disruptive". Steven1991 (talk) 23:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm PaulRKil. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to StopAntisemitism seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank You PaulRKil (talk) 00:35, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]