User talk:Ali aj809

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]

Hi Ali aj809! I noticed your contributions to Talk:Yom Kippur War and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

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! Drmies (talk) 13:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the notice on that talk page: "You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page". You are not extended-confirmed. The term is linked in that notice. Drmies (talk) 13:17, 16 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) 17:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 1991 Iraqi uprisings. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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. Feeglgeef (talk) 23:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a matter of me disagreeing with what other editors say, i am reverting repetitive disruptive edits and/or vandalism by IP users without accounts or sources to back up their claims Ali aj809 (talk) 00:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are very few exceptions to the policy against edit warring, and "unsourced" is not one of them. One of them is reverting obvious vandalism—edits that any well-intentioned user would agree constitute vandalism, such as page blanking and adding offensive language, but the phrase kurdish political victory in the north is not obvious vandalism. I recommend following the advice at WP:AVOIDEDITWAR. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is vandalism because it was added by an IP users without being discussed in the talk page or with anyone else. The result has been discussed many times before in the talk page which is why I am simply reverting it back to what all the editors agreed on Ali aj809 (talk) 12:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is not listed as an exception to the policy against edit warring, either. And it's clearly not what all the editors agree on – what about the editors you're reverting? jlwoodwa (talk) 14:18, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The point being is that I am reverting IP edits, not edits made by other editors, plus I've already gotten the situation taken care of since the page is now protected Ali aj809 (talk) 14:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
IP editors are still editors. jlwoodwa (talk) 14:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is understood, next time I will discuss in the talk page before immediately editing, if of course its not vandalism, thank you! Ali aj809 (talk) 15:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:3RR on Battle of Phase Line Bullet

[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

I suggest you self-revert as you are about to get sanctioned. Damian Lew (talk) 07:48, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bariq Al-Hajj Hanta moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Bariq Al-Hajj Hanta. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources and require rewriting to meet WP:NPOV. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. QEnigma (talk) 10:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your concern but might you explain to me what isnt neutral or what is "one sided" about the article that needs to be changed? Ali aj809 (talk) 04:30, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bariq Al-Hajj Hanta (August 1)

[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 Dan arndt was:
The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.
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.
Dan arndt (talk) 07:51, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Ali aj809! 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! Dan arndt (talk) 07:51, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]
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 the Syrian Civil War and ISIL. 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.

45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 17:26, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Baghdad clashes moved to draftspace

[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to 2025 Baghdad clashes. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and because it does not meet WP:LASTING requirements. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:48, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Via your request, do you mind telling me specifically what is wrong with it. Ali aj809 (talk) 17:25, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:2025 Baghdad clashes has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:2025 Baghdad clashes. Thanks! MWFwiki (talk) 22:18, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To reply to your argument, my MOS argument is that the article itself resembles past clashes in the capital of Iraq, Baghdad, like the 2021 Baghdad clashes and the 2022 Baghdad clashes. Ali aj809 (talk) 16:50, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2025 Baghdad clashes (October 17)

[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 NeoGaze was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Vast majority of references lead to either dead links (that couldn't be recovered with archive.org) or sources that do not support what is claimed. Please correct these issues.
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.
NeoGaze (talk) 23:06, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]