I may be busy sometimes, but I recommend that you add a new topic to the bottom of this page if you have any queries or questions for me.

I'll try my best to respond as fast as I can!

Any friendly message is welcome, but of course, anything more formal is also welcome. S.G. (talk) 16:04, 25 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SignedInteger! I noticed your contributions 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! CNMall41 (talk) 01:37, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by InterstellarGamer12321 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:

There is currently too much unsourced information in the article. Reliable, independent sources with significant coverage of the subject need to be added or the unsourced information should be removed.

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.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Beitar-Hapoel rivalry and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 11:10, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SignedInteger! 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! InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 11:10, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Beitar-Hapoel rivalry, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

~Kvng (talk) 18:08, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SignedInteger. Thank you for your work on Beitar-Hapoel rivalry. User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 03:01, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I noticed you reverted my edit to FC Barcelona in international football. Thanks for that, I don't know what happened. Great catch, and thanks for looking out! Phuzion (talk) 15:57, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! SignedInteger (talk) 16:25, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate, about your last Galatasaray edit, I think you might be right. That paragraph could be in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galatasaray_S.K._(football)#Crest_and_colours section but it is unnecesary for the opening section.

But I have a question. If I'm not mistaken, existence of that paragraph caused by existence of the "Fenerbahçe has won the Super Lig 19 times, but has also won an additional 8 pre-1959 titles which would put them ahead of rivals Galatasaray if recognised as official." paragraph in the Fenerbahçe S.K.'s opening section, as an opposite view and equal representation of the topic. And following your logic, that paragraph shouldn't be in the Fenerbahçe SK (football) title too. Because like you wrote in your last edit in the Galatasaray SK (football) section, I have never seen anything like this in the opening sections too. It may be have a separate topic or could be in the lower sections, ideally in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fenerbahçe_S.K._(football)#Club_crest_and_colours section.

And of course you are Fenerbahçe fan and have some kind of bias, but you didn't seem to me that a guy who are too biased in that matter. So that's why I'm suggesting you should consider my suggestion as an edit possibility. Because I don't want to edit that page and cause an edit war.

Have a nice day! UniqueHornClub (talk) 02:31, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know I am a fan of the club but that edit was made because for whatever reason in spite of the fact other Turkish clubs do not list them as official titles, The pre-1959 championships are listed in the same section as the Super Lig titles as if they were official. I made a talk page section about this on that page. SignedInteger (talk) 07:07, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I meant the Honours section which again unlike Fenerbahçe’s own rivals lists those titles as if they were official, something the official website of Fenerbahçe also does. SignedInteger (talk) 07:10, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect I regret nothing has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 31 § I regret nothing until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 22:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	In recognition for your updates to the the Yitzhak Klepter biography and many other fine contrubtions to Wikipedia! gidonb (talk) 15:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Lonnie Kris Wellington has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 8 § Lonnie Kris Wellington until a consensus is reached. 75.188.222.163 (talk) 13:03, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Billy Wilds has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 15 § Billy Wilds until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's film-related articles. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Film? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall quality of Wikipedia's film-related content. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. We also have a number of regional and topical task forces that you may be interested in joining as well. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! LDW5432 (talk) 18:58, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:49, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's articles on Israeli Cinema. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining the Israeli Cinema Task Force, a division of WikiProject Film? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall quality of Wikipedia's Israeli film-related content. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! LDW5432 (talk) 18:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:ASGORE.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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) 00:59, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HaPerah BeGani, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Smallangryplanet (talk) 15:20, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lehakat Pikud Tzafon, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 4% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You may also consider nominating a fact from the article within the next 7 days to appear on the Main Page's "Did you know" section.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 20:36, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! S.G. (talk) 20:37, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I note on the assessment request page for the military history project. The bottom line is that I assess this as C class under the military history guidelines but I think that the article is not within the scope of the project. Since I think this might be considered a close call, I will also ask current and a few former coordinators for an opinion on the coordinator talk page and will make a decision with the comments in mind.

My conclusions require some explanation, especially since you are new to the project. Although my comments may be of some use to new editors or assessors, I need to make this somewhat lengthy to adequately explain my conclusions. I am posting this here to not add such a lengthy text to the request page. I do note that anyone who may be interested can find this on your talk page. So please bear with me. (I will also save this somewhere since I occasionall need to use some or all of it in other comments and I won't need to rewrite it every time. FWIW.)

Coordinators, former coordinators and, occasionally, experience users and assessors, check Bot B class assignments monthly. (We are a little behind right now.) The bot does not directly report lower level assessments (Stub, start, C) and does not make higher level assessments (GA, A and FA). Coordinators and assessors are only likely to see lower level assessments when requests for assessments are made here, or sometimes by chance if they happen to read articles in their specialty. The bot assessments sometimes are changed by coordinators when they don't agree with the bot as to b1 adequate citation, b2 adequate coverage and whether the article is even within the scope of the project. Most months, coordinators remove the project banner from at least a few articles because they do not meet the guidelines for military history.

Assessors for this project require more for adequate citations and meeting b1. This is found at Wikipedia:Content assessment. "Be aware that a few projects have opted out of the standard quality scale, and use their own variation of the criteria more tuned for the subject area, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment." I think that there are now few, if any projects whose members do not follow the general information. The general b1 guideline is somewhat vague but it is repeated in our general assessment information which is the same as the overall information. I often forget to cite this but the guideline for this project is found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Academy/Citations and references. The whole academy information article is useful to see guidelines and suggestion for military history article composition. But the b1 requirements in the section "When to cite" are especially pertinent, The section specifically states that each paragraph must end with a citation. It is not presumed that a citation earlier in the paragraph verifies later information. The bot includes single sentence paragraphs, bullet point lists, tables and other lists as paragraphs. Human assessors do the same but if it is made clear or can be easily discovered that a caption, introduction or even a citation at the end supports the entire table or list, human assessors will not necessarily require that each point in the tables or lists have a citation.

In this article, there are paragraphs that do not end with citations, one or two sentences earlier in the paragraphs that are specific points which appear to require a citation because they could be contain information that could be challenged or required to be verified. In general, leads and infoboxes do not require citations for each paragraph or point, unless the information is not clearly cited in the body of the article. Also, at least two infobox points (origin location and recording labels) are not repeated or verified in the article. I will not go so far as to state that all the members in the member list or all the songs in the discography list need citations. The bot, and possibly some other assessor, might not agree but I doubt that would come into play, especially for the members who are the subject of articles or at the B level of assessment generally. If you have citations for the various albums, and can easily get them, from the recording label websites for example, it would be an improvement to add them. Also, it would avoid anyone tagging the list items for citations needed.

Occasionally I can determine or reasonably guess, the reason that the bot has found an article deficient under b2. There will be clues in what is in, or not in, the text. Other times, it is not so clear. In this case, the bot may have seen too little mention of the military and military history in general. I think the article meets b2. But it is for the suspected reason, that I think the article is not within the scope of the project.

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history#What topics do we cover?, point 2 of the 8 items, and note 3 in particular. "Military service does not in and of itself place an individual within the scope of the project—particularly in the case of service in modern militaries. To qualify them, an individual's military service must have been somehow noteworthy or have contributed—directly or indirectly—to their notability."

The article Israeli military ensembles states there are two types of military ensembles, military bands and entertainment troupes which present musical and theatrical performances, often including songs and sketches, for soldiers and the general public. The Lehakat Pikud Tzafon is clearly an entertainment troupe. The members are in the military because they are subject to compulsory military service. However, other than giving some performances, they spend their time preparing compositions and recording albums and songs. They are notable for their musical and entertainment presentations, which is the subject of almost everything in the article.

The closest American example that comes to mind are the The Del-Vikings, military personnel who had separate entertainment and musical careers while serving in the armed forces. The only possible distinctions are that they may not have been required to perform and, in fact, the members were subject to reassignment so the group membership changed until the group was reformed as a civilian band. This may not be definitive but I think the nature of Lehakat Pikud Tzafon – and the eventual disbandment of such groups of entertainers on military duty – is definitive.

I will reassess the article as C class and will not immediately remove the project banner. I will add citation needed tags because that may be all that is needed for a B class assessment from this project. I will ask for other opinions about whether this is within the project topics.

This project's assessment is usually being considered primary, even if other projects assessments are higher and can be shown as such. As I recall, the overall assessment bot, cewbot (as contrasted with the project bot, milhist bot) will make this overall assessment when it reviews articles with the military history project banner.

If the project banner is removed, the B class assessment will be retained. You could request that I remove the military history project banner before a decision is made here about that. Then the B assessment from articles for creation will be restored (possibly automatically or I can do it). I think you can remove any citation needed tags that I add (but not the one that is there now). However, it would be better to add the citations if you have or can find the sources without much trouble so no question could be raised about missing citations later.

I suggest that you follow the articles for creation advice and skip submitting new articles to that page. You have done a good job with this article. In my opinion, you do not need comments from random assessors who may specialize in other topics in their own areas if you are writing about military history (or anything else as near as I can tell). If you find this still helpful and an easy way to get an evaluation, feel free to ask at articles for creation.

You can sometimes get comments on military history articles at assessment requests, by asking coordinators, task force members or general posts on the project talk page, if you need them at all. You are likely to get comments at peer review from members of this project because the request list is carrier over to the military history project talk page. Peer reviews are usually requested for B class articles when the author, or editor who greatly improves or expands the article, wishes to get advice about needed improvements or additions for higher level assessments. Donner60 (talk) 07:11, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will say that the reason I included it within that scope is because every other Israeli military ensemble page puts it within the scope of that project (See here, here, and and here). That is all I will say about this, since really, I would've requested an assessment at Wikiproject Israel, but that section of the Wikiproject has requests from 2014 and appears to be inactive. Thank you for your advice regarding the article, too. S.G. (talk) 13:56, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I do recommend you include the other pages I linked in discussions about if my article fits or not and instead ask if any of the Israeli military ensembles fit or not. Those three pages (While not as in-depth as mine, they're still fine for what they are.) were clearly never assessed manually by a member of this project given your reaction to my article. I'd have to guess that the reason why they weren't assessed or requested for assessment is because they do fit within start-class (Take the IAF Band page for example) and thus there is no reason for them to be assessed. S.G. (talk) 14:21, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments and the information about other similar articles. They too will need to be reviewed. Although I think that the entertainment ensembles, are not within the scope of the project, I think it may be a close enough call that I should ask other coordinators and a few former coordinators to tell me what their opinions are. I think the military bands may be considered within the scope, so separate opinions for those would also be a good idea. I am open to a broader interpretation of the scope for entertainment bands if others think it is proper. This also becomes a more general question since there are other articles about entertainment ensembles that are tagged as within the scope and were not assessed by a human assessor. I am more satisfied than before that I should ask for more opinions rather than following my usual course of just removing the project banner from articles that I think are not within the scope of the project. I also think it would be good to have opinions about military bands that may be more closely considered to be a topic of "military history", not just entertainers who happen to be in the military.

Your comments about other project assessments brings up a point that I need to research. Many projects are now inactive. A few may still have editors/users who look at the talk page occasionally and may rate articles. I have not assessed articles that are not within the scope of the project but I am willing to assess articles according to the general guidelines upon direct request on my talk page from users who are obviously writing C or B class articles and cannot get the assessments elsewhere. I will let you know if I discover another way to request assessments other than from articles for creation and the individual projects. Donner60 (talk) 00:40, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

After writing the above comments, I turned to the assessment page and saw that Swatjester, a coordinator, gives at least a preliminary opinion about this being within the scope of the project. So I will take that into account and review this further. I have not posted this yet to the coordinator page which I will do shortly. It would be good, especially for me anyway, to have a definitive interpretation about this type of ensemble since the question is likely to arise again, and I, at least, have not made or seen a definitive conclusion about it. Donner60 (talk) 01:01, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My belief regarding it is this: The Israeli military ensembles that fall within the entertainment sphere are in a weird spot where they fit as pop bands (several of them were voted as Band of the Year on the Israeli Annual Hebrew Song Chart) but they are also a part of the IDF proper.

There are three things that make them unique in this regard:

1. They are expected to be subordinate to their departments, and have their own commander, even though they're entertainment bands. This, to me, indicates that they are seen as units of whatever department of the IDF they fit into. The counterpoint to this is that, of course, they were expected to do that; they're serving in the military, but the entertainment ensembles having their own commander is what makes this point more important.
2. The Chief of the General Staff or any superior officer in whatever department the bands fit into have the authority to disband them. Rafael Eitan disbanded all of the entertainment bands in 1978 for example. A smaller example of this is shown in my draft about the Central Command Band where the band was disbanded in 1968 and 1989 due to behavioral issues. This is something that makes them clearly a part of the military to me (in the sense that they are more than just entertainers serving in the military, they are units that can be disbanded at any time, if the superior officers believe there is a valid reason to do so), but this is just my assessment.
3. Even though they did perform programs and record albums, these were things that were paid for by the Ministry of Defense. The financial part of the ensembles was part of the reason Eitan disbanded them in 1978. In this brief interview he gave to a newspaper in 1989, he states the following (translated by me): "I know personally that there's barely any money left for tank drills. We conserve ammunition and cut down on flight hours. We can't cut costs in the field equipment while also overspending on the entertainment department." Again, this indicates that all of the bands (marching or entertainment) are a part of the IDF as units.

I'd like to see what you think of these things that I mentioned and I think that you should bring these up in further discussions. S.G. (talk) 01:13, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and one more thing. There is one example I can think of that is of someone who served in one of these bands but also served in the military on a combat basis. Uzi Hitman, in another draft of mine, he said that two-thirds of his service were in combat roles. I do think he is likely an exception, but I still wanted to mention him. I hope I'm not being too unclear here or maybe misunderstanding your words. I apologise if I am. S.G. (talk) 01:31, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article introduces another element, his popular song about a military topic. The article does not give an example of combat service notability, rather than simply service. Again, this may fall under point 2 note 3 cited of the topics we cover, cited in full above. The article is not about the song alone, but then again, it does seem to come under point 8 of the topics we cover. Perhaps this is a sufficient reason to include the article under military history as well as other projects. That may need to be a topic for discussion as well. Donner60 (talk) 01:46, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SignedInteger: I have reassessed the article as B class after your revisions. Since it is now B class for all projects, the inclusion in the scope of the project is the only open question for this and similar articles about entertainment ensembles. I am now tending toward a conclusion to keep it within the scope of the project. I will take a little time to decide whether to ask for further opinions or just leave it within the scope given the facts pointed out by you and Swatjester. Pinging so this later comment does not get lost among the others. Donner60 (talk) 02:15, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. For now, I will go back to improving existing articles. Ping me if you have an update on this. S.G. (talk) 02:25, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In view of the additional information that you and Swatjester provided and the limited number of articles likely to have similar facts and circumstances, and in order to not spend more time on this or to involve others in the discussion at this busy time, I will leave the military history banner on this and similar articles as within the scope of the project. Thanks for your patience and contributions to military history and Wikipedia in general. Donner60 (talk) 01:52, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I must mention that I have nominated one of these newly made articles for GA in the warfare subtopic. Hopefully, whoever reviews it is aware of the unique circumstances of these ensembles, but if not, I will inform them about it, assuming it gets reviewed soon but I can wait. There's a lot of articles there that need reviews (or just a check to see if they should get reviewed) too aside from mine, so I'm not expecting anything at the moment. S.G. (talk) 02:03, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One final thing, I'm going to be adding the military history project tag to Ammunition Hill due to the fact that the song makes use of first hand accounts of Israeli veterans of the battle (see the article, all three accounts/interviews are cited). It is somewhat like the movie Gettysburg, it isn't that accurate to the actual battle but it is a depiction of it through another lens, in this case, music. If you disagree with that, please let me know. I'll be assessing it as start class for now. S.G. (talk) 02:16, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be a mature editor and don't have to jump through the hoops of draft article approvement for articles with solid content. --Altenmann >talk 04:48, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I do still have to get it assessed. If I'm being honest, with the amount of coverage and sources article has, I do think it could be reasonably nominated for GA. But that's for later, there are several parts of it that could be included on the main page as DYK factoids, though. S.G. (talk) 04:53, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the comment by User:Altenmann. Donner60 (talk) 01:54, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mi Yada She'Kach Yieye, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Nil🥝 03:37, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm new to being a Wikipedia editor (just created an account 2 minutes ago). I don't see an edit button or tab on the Wikipedia page I'm on. What is the issue? Thanks! --Kosher Kitty (talk) 00:35, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thanks for reaching out. What page are you on? It is possible that the page that you're on is protected from editing. See here for more information. This is usually the case, since instead of an edit button it says "view source." I should note that what I said applies to desktop; on mobile, it instead shows a pen with a lock next to it. If this is not the case, let me know. Thanks! S.G. (talk) 02:04, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I clicked "view source" for both pages ("Israel" and "Gaza Genocide" and both say

"This page is currently protected so that only extended confirmed users and administrators can edit it." Kosher Kitty (talk) 06:13, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That means you cannot edit the page directly. Instead, you can file an edit request on the talk pages for both articles. (See what I linked for more information on that) The only way for you to edit them directly is by becoming an extended confirmed user, which requires at least 500+ edits, amongst other criterions. The only other way to become extended confirmed is by requesting extended confirmed rights from the admins but this is usually only given to legitimate alternate accounts of users who already have those rights, I'm unaware of any cases where this is given to a new user. I should also note that due to these being about contentious topics, you should ensure that what you're requesting to add is backed up by reliable sources. If you have any other questions, let me know. S.G. (talk) 06:19, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems I have to know source code to request an edit...and I don't. Or am I missing something? Thank you, I am obviously new to this. Kosher Kitty (talk) 16:44, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, this depends on the type of edit.

There's three helpful "invisible" comments (as in comments only viewable in the source editor/source code) that try to help on what to do:

"Place a description of your suggested change below this comment. Be sure to explain why your edit is needed. If your edit is more than one or two sentences, then delete the "Diff:" text below, put your changes in this template's sandbox and link to the sandbox below."

"Replace "ORIGINAL_WIKITEXT" (below this line) with the wikitext (source code) that you want to be changed."

"Replace "CHANGED_WIKITEXT" (below this line) with your requested new wikitext."

These should help you understand what to put in (it isn't really any code, for the second and third comment, just find the section that you want to change and copy and paste it into the "ORIGINAL_WIKITEXT" and then copy and paste your edit into the "CHANGED_WIKITEXT").

For anything more major than that, I recommend against filing those sort of requests since the chances of them being accepted is next to zero. This is especially true for requests related to any FAQs mentioned in the talk pages for either article. See the FAQs for Israel and FAQs for Gaza genocide for more info. I know this may come off as pessimistic but for these sort of contentious topics, there is a lot of protection put in place for major edits and major edit requests. Let me know if your edit request is minor or major, and if it is uncontroversial or not. (If not, do not file the request, it will be declined). S.G. (talk) 17:31, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, this is so helpful! My requested edit is pretty minor, I just want to change the statement that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza to "While some believe Israel is committing genocide in Gaza," because different organizations/countries/groups have different opinions. Then there remains the following sentence that some countries disagree. To me this is more accurate. So I did copy and paste the text I wanted changed, then typed in my suggested edit, then pressed "Publish" but not sure what effect, if any, that had; it just brought me back to the page of existing edits and discussion around them. Kosher Kitty (talk) 19:11, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see your user talk page for important information. 331dot (talk) 19:44, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add a google map screen capture to question the veracity of BRO's claim of building a road to 19,400 ft in Northern India? --Darkrangertelescopetours (talk) 04:49, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thanks for reaching out, but to answer your question:

As far as I'm aware, you cannot use Google Maps screenshots for Wikipedia articles, likely due to copyright issues. I should also note that there is no consensus on how reliable Google Maps is as a source in general. instead you can use OpenStreetMap for the same purpose, provided it is backed up with a source, since we do not allow original research.

To check this, I've checked articles related to this subject and they all use OpenStreetMap and not Google Maps.

Also, I should note that if your claim does not have a source to back it up, it does have a chance of remaining on Wikipedia but do expect it to be followed by a "[citation needed]" tag since again, we can't just publish claims we ourselves made. If you have any other questions, let me know. S.G. (talk) 04:59, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]