User talk:Vice regent

Hi, this is my discussion page. Do not hesitate to leave message for me. Old messages are eventually archived.

Archives

Archives (Index) 2012/April 2012/May 2012/June 2012/July 2012/September 2012/November 2013/January 2013/February 2013/June 2013/October 2013/November 2013/December 2014/January 2014/February 2015/January 2015/February 2015/November 2016/September 2016/October 2016/November 2017/March 2017/April 2017/May 2017/June 2017/December 2018/January 2018/February 2018/May 2018/November 2018/December 2019/January 2019/February 2019/March 2019/November 2019/December 2020/March 2020/April 2020/May 2020/June 2020/July 2020/August 2020/September 2020/October 2020/November 2020/December 2021/January 2021/February 2021/March 2021/May 2021/June 2021/July 2021/August 2021/September 2021/October 2021/November 2021/December 2022/January 2022/February 2022/March 2022/May 2022/June 2022/July 2022/August 2022/September 2022/November 2022/December 2023/January 2023/February 2023/March 2023/April 2023/June 2023/July 2023/August 2023/October 2023/November 2023/December 2024/January 2024/April 2024/May 2024/June 2024/July 2024/August 2024/September 2024/October This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Responding to this, I don't disagree, and I'm sure there is other sourcing that presents the information differently. With what was presented and taking a quick look the report wasn't flagrantly incorrect. My point is that AE isn't the venue to look at 40 such diffs, compile or have other editors compile sources for an analysis, and compare the language used, sources available, and how that changes depending on the subject of the article. That's what the evidence and workshop phases of an Arbcom case are for. The fact that you wanted to (and should!) present counter-evidence and analysis shows that the limitations of AE can't handle that. It would be one thing if there were a few examples given, as is often the case, and the subject of the report can reply, but as I'm you're well aware if we start setting up diff analysis tables and wording examinations we'll have a hundred thousand words there in a week. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AE not being the venue does not mean it should be referred to ArbCom. It means you should decline to take action. If a user wants to go to ArbCom with that complaint that is their prerogative, you referring a case however is the admins saying ArbCom should deal with this, not that AE should not. nableezy - 20:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They should deal with it as there is a case on its way. There were also (and have been in the past) accusations that the report and behavior is tendentious. That is something Arbcom should be looking at in the coming case. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:40, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ScottishFinnishRadish, got it, thanks.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 20:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Tel al-Sultan attack, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 November 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 05:38, 15 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) 00:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You offered a statement in an arbitration enforcement referral. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 23:59, 14 December 2024 (UTC), which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 06:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi VR. You added a short form reference for "Daher 2024" to Baalbek[1] but there's no "Daher 2024" cite in the article. Could you add the missing cites to the sources section? -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 16:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind I was able to confirm that this was Daher 2019 Hezbollah: Mobilization and Power and fix the reference. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 01:49, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ActivelyDisinterested, sorry just saw this. Yes that's correct. I had copied and pasted references from other articles without copying and pasting the main sfn ref.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 17:18, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm notifying you that I have listed your name at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5/Evidence#Seven proposed parties as being among the most active editors in Palestine/Israel noticeboard disputes, and I have proposed that you participate as a party to the case. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:29, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this message because you are on the update list for Palestine-Israel articles 5. The drafters note that the scope of the case was somewhat unclear, and clarify that the scope is The interaction of named parties in the WP:PIA topic area and examination of the WP:AE process that led to two referrals to WP:ARCA. Because this was unclear, two changes are being made:

First, the Committee will accept submissions for new parties for the next three days, until 23:59, 10 December 2024 (UTC). Anyone who wishes to suggest a party to the case may do so by creating a new section on the evidence talk page, providing a reason with WP:DIFFS as to why the user should be added, and notifying the user. After the three-day period ends, no further submission of parties will be considered except in exceptional circumstances. Because the Committee only hears disputes that have failed to be resolved by the usual means, proposed parties should have been recently taken to AE/AN/ANI, and either not sanctioned, or incompletely sanctioned. If a proposed party has not been taken to AE/AN/ANI, evidence is needed as to why such an attempt would have been ineffective.

Second, the evidence phase has been extended by a week, and will now close at 23:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC). For the Arbitration Committee, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

As a note, per these community-authorized general sanctions, there is a one-revert rule in place for all articles related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, broadly construed. This means that an editor in this area may make no more than one revert per article per 24 hour period, unless an obvious exception applies. Please let me know if you have any questions about this. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you that India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan 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. - Ratnahastin (talk) 02:20, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Badr has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 04:21, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In June, you changed the infobox here to be materially different than those of the other bombardments mentioned the first paragraph of this article: Hamburg, Dresden, London. Your edit comment refers to Talk, but there was no discussion of this issue there. Would be appreciative if you could fill me in on the rationale for this very obvious inconsistency. Thx.

Hello, Vice regent. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Sea Sultan".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Marco Mendicino, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi VR. Just dropping in to see if I could get your opinion on a new topic on raised on the Israeli bombardment article. It's very connected to the discussion we were having on Dresden, Hamburg, London, etc. Here, I'm pointing out the incongruity of the infobox template. Thx! Johnadams11 (talk) 16:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello VR! What happened to your userpage? I liked how it looks and it sucks to see it go Abo Yemen✉ 16:46, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Abo Yemen really? I can bring it back...VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 00:29, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it did. Just change the colors to match your signature's colors 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 06:53, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5 has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

• All articles whose topic is strictly within the Arab-Israeli conflict topic area shall be extended confirmed protected by default, without requiring prior disruption on the article.
• AndreJustAndre, BilledMammal, Iskandar323, Levivich, Makeandtoss, Nableezy, Nishidani, and Selfstudier are indefinitely topic banned from the Palestine-Israel conflict, broadly construed. These restrictions may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
• Zero0000 is warned for their behavior in the Palestine-Israel topic area, which falls short of the conduct expected of an administrator.
• Should the Arbitration Committee receive a complaint at WP:ARCA about AndreJustAndre, within 12 months of the conclusion of this case, AndreJustAndre may be banned from the English Wikipedia by motion.
• WP:Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict#Word limits (discretionary) and WP:Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict#Word limits (1,000 words) are both modified to add as a new second sentence to each: Citations and quotations (whether from sources, Wikipedia articles, Wikipedia discussions, or elsewhere) do not count toward the word limit.
• Any AE report is limited to a max of two parties: the party being reported, and the filer. If additional editors are to be reported, separate AE reports must be opened for each. AE admins may waive this rule if the particular issue warrants doing so.
• The community is encouraged to run a Request for Comment aimed at better addressing or preventing POV forks, after appropriate workshopping.
• The Committee recognizes that working at AE can be a thankless and demanding task, especially in the busy PIA topic area. We thus extend our appreciation to the many administrators who have volunteered their time to help out at AE.
• Editors are reminded that outside actors have a vested interest in this topic area, and might engage in behaviors such as doxxing in an attempt to influence content and editors. The digital security resources page contains information that may help.
• Within this topic area, the balanced editing restriction is added as one of the sanctions that may be imposed by an individual administrator or rough consensus of admins at AE.

• If a sockpuppet investigations clerk or member of the CheckUser team feels that third-party input is not helpful at an investigation, they are encouraged to use their existing authority to ask users to stop posting to that investigation or to SPI as a whole. In addition to clerks and members of the CheckUser team, patrolling administrators may remove or collapse contributions that impede the efficient resolution of investigations without warning.

For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 23:58, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 5 closed