User talk:Ukudoks

Welcome!

Hello, Ukudoks, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Gaismagorm (talk) 00:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Salutations, thank you for the welcome Ukudoks (talk) 00:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Gaismagorm (talk) 00:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Sean.hoyland (talk) 15:46, 8 June 2024 (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.

Welcome!

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

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

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

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

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

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

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Selfstudier (talk) 17:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Hello, I'm 48JCL. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Asqueladd that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 48JCL TALK 22:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@48JCL: Salutations, it is a matter of accuracy and nuance, I merely explained (in relative detail) my points and :@Asqueladd: explained their views on my points. I did thank Asqueladd for providing a source but alas, the source in question (objectively speaking) is questionable (since the author has an incentive to propagate the narrative created, this is not "conspiracy talk" I'm merely looking at the facts and putting 1+1 together, all other relative points have been explained in Asqueladd talk page). Ukudoks (talk) 05:06, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions, but we are trying to write an encyclopedia here, so please keep your edits factual and neutral. Our readers are looking for serious articles and will not find joke edits amusing. Remember that Wikipedia is a widely used reference tool, so we have to take what we do here seriously. If you'd like to experiment with editing, use your sandbox instead. Thank you. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 20:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fantastic Mr. Fox: I aim to please, and I absolutely understand our commitment to write factual and accurate articles, which is why discussion is important for us to understand (and thus) know the truth. If you are interested I would appreciate help on this particular Martino della Torre article I'm currently contributing. Ukudoks (talk) 20:16, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Nivzaq (talk) 16:07, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ukudoks I suggest you respond there and explain your actions. Otherwise, you will undoubtedly be blocked. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 20:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An educated guess is that the Wikipedians who have launched a Crusade against me for contributing to the articles, have already made up their minds, and by responding to the conversation I only give credibility to those who have malice in their minds. As always addressing the effect of a question while dismissing the cause of your plight Ukudoks (talk) 20:33, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

When you wrote And let us not forget modern biases which cloud almost all historians who work for public institutions, most of them (I'm making an assumption here) are simply regurgitating unrealiable information. Whether or not I can claim what historians are writing and/or telling is the truth or not is irrelevant because all of us know, they are clueless as much as we are. I think better option is for an independent Wikipedian to look through the surviving archives and find out what really is going on., you demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of Wikipedia's core content policies. Cullen328 (talk) 02:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Battle of Kamani

The article Battle of Kamani has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Duplicate article of Kamani massacre

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]