User talk:75.142.254.3

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, and thank you for lending your time to help improve Wikipedia! If you are interested in continuing to edit, I suggest you create an account to gain additional privileges. Happy editing! 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 06:26, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

[edit]
Hello, 75.142.254.3. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by GoingBatty (talk) 06:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

Welcome!

[edit]

Hi 75.142.254.3! 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! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

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.

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you continue to violate WP:ECR as you did here you will be blocked from editing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Made an article as an IP?

[edit]

I made this article Draft:Spira Award. I think I did it correctly? I noted Fredo Durand was an orphan article, so I made this one. Because he was awarded the spira award, so I figured that I'd make that article and then use it to make the Fredo Durand article no longer orphaned. I also just posted this on the chat just in case. 75.142.254.3 (talk) 01:29, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! We're also talking about this on IRC, where I reminded you that the instructions on the top of the draft states "To be accepted, a draft should: Show the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article by using sources. The sources should be (1) reliable (2) secondary (3) independent of the subject (4) talk about the subject in some depth." Your draft as submitted only has one source. GoingBatty (talk) 01:50, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Spira Award (March 15)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sophisticatedevening was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Sophisticatedevening (talk) 01:51, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, 75.142.254.3! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sophisticatedevening (talk) 01:51, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question about content to be posted?

[edit]

Please help me with... Is this (https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/mounted-officer-appears-to-whip-photographer-during-stormy-anti-govt-protest-in-tel-aviv/) notable enough to have a separate article? If not, where should it be included? 75.142.254.3 (talk) 03:56, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mu. (WP:Contentious topics/Arab-Israeli conflict) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:01, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should information from this video be included in the USS Liberty Incident article?

[edit]

Please help me with... Does it qualify as reliable? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD5gtM1A990 For this article? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident 75.142.254.3 (talk) 02:34, 31 May 2025 (UTC) 75.142.254.3 (talk) 02:34, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever your views of Candace Owens, she seems to be just reading out a first-account ie. primary source. We have no way of knowing how genuine or accurate that source is, or indeed how faithfully she is reciting it. You might just about be able to use this to support a non-contentious, straightforward statement of some sort, but I would rather not, myself. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:24, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

[edit]

Please help me with... https://imgur.com/4WQRu2c https://imgur.com/2spHSm5

They showed two photos on twitter. One shows damage to one side of the building and no smoke and was taken close perhaps to avoid showing the smoke behind it. The other shows smoke but little to no damage to the building and intact car windows and was taken perhaps to make it look like smoke was coming from the hospital. If they were able to take a photo that close as per the closer photo, it is unusual that they didn't just show the area that was damaged (where the smoke is coming from). I don't think the hospital was hit. Al-Jazeera mentioned that it was an attack against a military objective (I think: "Odeh said that damage to the hospital was the result of a blast wave, not a direct missile hit, corroborating claims by Iranian state media that the target of the attack was a “sensitive” site adjacent to the hospital." /// https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2025/6/19/live-israel-attacks-iran-security-agency-trump-mulls-joining-conflict?update=3785413) that was nearby and a shockwave caused damage to the hospital. However, this article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soroka_Medical_Center#21st_century) says it was a direct hit ("during the Iran-Israel War the hospital was struck by an Iranian missile"). I don't know if Al-Jazeera is treated as reliable on Wikipedia for this sort of thing. I don't know if I should edit the article either for a number of reasons. 75.142.254.3 (talk) 19:34, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a question for the talk page of the relevant article - RichT|C|E-Mail 19:57, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]