User talk:Iskandar323/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Arbitration case request

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Promoting Iranian government POV in Wikipedia? and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 15:10, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello Iskandar323,

The Arbitration Committee has decided to procedurally remove the case request Promoting Iranian government POV in Wikipedia? as invalid. Details can be found at the bottom of Special:Permalink/1214583983 § Promoting Iranian government POV in Wikipedia?: Case request removed.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:18, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi Iskandar323 :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 19:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Q

https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/04/04/gaza-israeli-strike-killing-106-civilians-apparent-war-crime

Is there an article about this strike? Selfstudier (talk) 19:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Selfstudier: I don't believe so. It was overshadowed by 31 October 2023 Jabalia refugee camp airstrike, although perhaps misguidedly in hindsight. Was thinking it should go up. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:36, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Yea, I thought it was that but apparently not, I have to go undo my edits there, thanks. Selfstudier (talk) 20:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Selfstudier: Yes, it's a bit buried down the page, but the building was south of the Nuseirat camp. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:01, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Category:Religious extremism by country has been nominated for merging

Category:Religious extremism by country has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 21:29, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors April 2024 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors April 2024 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the April 2024 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members. We wish you all happy copy-editing. Election results: In our December 2023 coordinator election, Zippybonzo stepped down as coordinator; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Dhtwiki and Miniapolis were reelected coordinators, and Wracking was newly elected coordinator, to serve through 30 June. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators will open on 1 June (UTC). Drive: 46 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive, 32 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 289 articles totaling 626,729 words. Barnstars awarded are here. Blitz: 23 editors signed up for our February Copy Editing Blitz. 18 claimed at least one copy-edit and between them, they copy-edited 100,293 words in 32 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. Drive: 53 editors signed up for our March Backlog Elimination Drive, 34 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 300 articles totaling 587,828 words. Barnstars awarded are here. Blitz: Sign up for our April Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 14 to 20 April. Barnstars will be awarded here. Progress report: As of 23:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 109 requests since 1 January 2024, and the backlog stands at 2,480 articles. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Wracking. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Damascus consulate bombing talk pages messed up

It looks like you're not an admin (I'm not either). We probably need admin help to sort out the talk pages current consensus 'Israeli bombing...' and non-consensus 'bombing...', otherwise the discussions risk getting mixed up and all over the place ... Boud (talk) 13:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Oshwah may be able to help ... Boud (talk) 13:25, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

@Boud: Ah yes, I see. I didn't realise the talk page hadn't followed. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I would've tried moving it over the redirect myself, but someone added a comment onto the redirect page that ought to be preserved, so I opened a technical move request --Gimmethegepgun (talk) 18:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting this. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Novem Linguae fixed it, though no idea if they read the RMT --Gimmethegepgun (talk) 10:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I didn't see the RMTR at the time. Someone mentioned it at AN. I decided not to preserve the diff with the comment in it since it looks like someone else did a copy paste move of it to the bigger talk page. Hopefully that is all neatly resolved now. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: Sorry if my request made things more complicated :c. Well, it looks like things were already complicated, but still.

I hadn't looked too deeply into it, just saw your AN links were for different pages, saw why, saw that the title of the article matched the one in the close message, but not the talk page and decided to be cheeky and request it where people were already looking (not that I even remembered the technical requests pages existed). – 143.208.236.57 (talk) 12:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Nah you're good. Fixing the talk page to line up with the main article was uncontroversial. You're not technically supposed to be involved in this topic area though. You should go make an account so you can start working towards WP:ARBECR. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:50, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Funnily enough, WP:A/I/PIA (and most others?), do not apply to userspace, because the general sanctions only apply to the area of conflict, who's definition in the case specifically exclude userspace.

But yeah, fair, I'm not planning or interested in dealing with most contentious topics anyways :s. – 143.208.236.57 (talk) 12:56, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

"single source" mania

Greetings, I appreciate your efforts to enhance Wikipedia article quality. However, rather than merely adding tags like "single source", it would be more constructive to actively improve the articles themselves. Although I'm less experienced, I hope you'll be open to feedback from a fellow Wikipedian.Cwainman (talk) 10:55, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Iskandar323. Thank you for your work on En Harod. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

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

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 13:27, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Iskandar323. Thank you for your work on Nakba denial. User:Lightburst, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

I have reviewed the article. I cannot see the deleted article from the 2011 AfD but this article appears to be acurate based on the references. It appears from the previous AfD that the article was called out as synth and OR; I do not see that issue in this article. Well done, thanks for the article.

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

Lightburst (talk) 15:26, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

@Lightburst: Thanks. I'm glad someone appreciates hard work and good sourcing. I thought that rigorously basing the article on peer-reviewed material might get me some slack, but evidently not. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:57, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Iskandar323 I don't know whether you are kidding around or you seriously thought that article was going to fly as it was, but I don't think a period of international tension is the right time to be stoking the flames on Wikipedia. I find sectarian conflicts extremely distasteful but I am not going to avoid the topic as many will do. Can you explain why the article only expresses one point of view and why it often does so in the voice of Wikipedia stating opinions as facts? —DIYeditor (talk) 11:17, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

The timing is questionable too. We've just had a discussion (I think it was yesterday) surrounding the 1948 exodus on the Israel article. Homerethegreat (talk) 14:10, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure you mean by the article "flying" - the way that Wikipedia works is that someone creates a page and other people edit it. That's the process. Good for you for getting involved. No page ever "flies" in the very first form that it initially emerges in. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:55, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Iskandar323. Thank you for your work on Beheading by Salafi jihadist groups. 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) 18:09, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

that looks interesting. Irtapil (talk) 15:26, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Removing information

Bro, why are you removing information from articles? Elekonsult (talk) 13:38, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Removing unreliable/self-published source

You removed information on the Netzah Yehuda Battalion page because of the source. The information you removed included

“The battalion had its first casualty on August 19, 2006, when a member of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades shot and killed Staff Sergeant Roi Farjoun of Yehud at the Beka'otCheckpoint east of Nablus. A nearby Netzah Yehuda soldier then opened fire, and killed the attacker.”

The source is the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. You dispute this source?

Here are two other news articles discussing what you removed because you claimed it was unreliable

https://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4367570,00.html

https://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/656783?amp=1 109.186.220.13 (talk) 06:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Make an edit request on the page. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:37, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Okay so fix your mistake? You the soulless Wikipedia editor. Gotcha 109.186.220.13 (talk) 11:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Category:Murdered artists has been nominated for deletion

Category:Murdered artists has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 21:08, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Help needed at Abu Lu'lu'a Firuz, re addition of Persian name and concerns of circular sourcing

Your input would be appreciated at Talk:Abu Lu'lu'a Firuz#Sources for the name Piruz Nahavandi. Summaries of the dispute and discussion thread may be found here. Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 15:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

JC discussion

After all more than a third of the comments there are yours. I was accused of bludgeoning on the ADL RfC when only about 20% of the comments there were mine (and you were close behind me there...)

Vegan416 (talk) 15:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Comment count is not the definition of WP:BLUDGEON. Selfstudier (talk) 15:15, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

It's one of the measures. And the most simple and objective one. One could also count the number of characters each user wrote, or the percentage of comments one responded to, but that's a lot of work to do manually. Maybe some day I'll write a script that does that, but I don't have time for it now. All other measure are more subjective. Vegan416 (talk) 15:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Well, by that measure, you are heading the comment leaderboard at ADL, lol. Selfstudier (talk) 15:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I know. That's why I didn't complain about Dronbogus warnings to me there and humbly accepted his(\her?) limiting me to no more than 3 additional comments in the ADL discussion. but I said Iskandar323 was also at the top there, close behind me. Vegan416 (talk) 15:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Pretty sure you would be right up there on total text as well. Selfstudier (talk) 15:55, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Well, I'm not going to spend time on checking that. Maybe if I write that script some day we can test that hypothesis. Anyway my subjective impression is that Iskandar323 leads here in total text as well, but I'm not going to count that either. Anyway what are you doing here? Are you following me around? I'm flattered. Nice to chat. But I have to make a break for a day or two again to keep sane. Over and out. Vegan416 (talk) 16:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

ISk page is on my watchlist, I have no interest in watching you. Selfstudier (talk) 16:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm the OP and people keep prompting me too respond, so I don't think my reply rate is particularly surprising. Now why you responded to my specific response to The Kip (before they'd even had a chance to respond) to accuse me of double standards is a great Q. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

The page WP:BLUD doesn't contain any exemption for the person who opened the discussion, and rightly so, why would the OP have more right to dominate the discussion than other participants? Anyway I have written now a quick and dirty script as I suggested. You cab find the code in C# here. Using it I can see that you have written 27% of the comments and 25% of the text in the JC discussion. This is coming close to the 33% limit mentioned in WP:BLUD: "If your comments take up one-third of the total text or you have replied to half the people who disagree with you, you are likely bludgeoning the process". For comparison when @Dronebogus imposed a 3 additional edits limit on me in the ADL discussion on April 18 I had made only 16% of the comments and 18% of the text there... Vegan416 (talk) 10:03, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

You're turning up a week later to tell me I'm below the threshold ... unnecessary, but thanks. Worth noting that the thread in question is a discussion, not a simple list of !vote comments, so the anticipation is a bit of back and forth, new evidence (of which there was plenty), etc. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

The WP:BLUD page doesn't make any distinction between RfCs and other discussions. Nor does the WP:RfC page say that RfC should contain only !votes and not discussions and new evidence. Vegan416 (talk) 14:03, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

It's almost like this volunteer project is not a bureaucracy and not for lawyering. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Opinion

Hi, what is your opinion on nominating the "Wahhabism" page to good article nomination? I thought it might be good to analyze its pros and cons. The main negative is that the page suffers from constant disruptive editing, so without some sort of permanent protection (extended-confirmed, in my opinion), the page may deteriorate in quality over time. Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 7:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

I can probably still identify some areas for improvement without recourse to the GA process. I get the impression that there's still plenty more to be done. The definitions section is still overly long – these things don't tend to go on for this long. The "contemporary usage" part could potentially be moved to the end of page and relabelled as western historiography or something, as usage isn't really definition or ethnology. I think there could also be more selectivity with the material and sources here. The whole section is still quite overblown. In practical terms, it shouldn't take that long to wade through the first introductory section just to get to the history, beliefs, etc. Skimming through the page more generally, I still see plenty of very large paragraphs that have only a single source at the very end, so I think the in-line citation likely needs fleshing out, or some of this material reducing in terms of weight. The overall length, while down, is still significant. Most featured articles are around 12k words. Here, we're still at 13.5k+. Worth bearing in mind. There are also sections rendered in bullet points when there's little cause for it and prose should really be used. I can probably keep going for a while along these lines. I have an eye for attention to detail ... Iskandar323 (talk) 08:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Islam in Southeast Asia

Can you help out and keep an eye on this article? Especially considering these types of edits. There seems to be edits by a user with a seemingly biased POV on several topics on Islam, Southeast Asia, India/Hinduism. I'm concerned as there has been users in the past (who were banned as sockpuppets, etc.) who have edited Southeast Asian Islam articles, with a undue and often inaccurate emphasis or inclusion of forced conversions, often misinterpreting sources and scholarly consensus. More eyes needed on relatively niche topics where it has been fashionable for biased users to make edits in subjects related to Islam and/or Hinduism. SlackingViceroy (talk) 00:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

@SlackingViceroy: This sort of topic is teeming with disruptive editing. I avoid a lot of South Asian + religion topics because it's just so unproductive working in those spaces giving the disruption past, present and future. I mainly just do bandaid work, as above. Iskandar323 (talk) 00:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Understandable, I avoid such topics myself too for the same reasons. However, I've noticed that the same type of disruptions have recently bleeding to areas barely related like Southeast Asia or East Asia, with Islam being the only commonality. As one editor once said recently: "The hostility that various sectors of the project bear toward religion in general and Islam in particular is unfortunate. Perhaps this is a reminder for the community to be vigorous about the quality of sources used to document Islam and Muslim people/events/groups/etc."

I also edit on Eastern Christianity and Buddhism-related articles and hardly see such POV disruptions in comparison. I still plan on editing on topics on the anthropology and history of Asian Islam and of Muslim minorities in Eurasia, as so few people seem to and pages on anything related to it will likely spiral to anti-Muslim screeds and outright misinformation. Thank you for hearing me ramble and I appreciate your contributions I have seen around the project. SlackingViceroy (talk) 23:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Reverted you

Hey, I reverted this. Can you rewrite your comment? Something technical went wrong. VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 18:41, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I was wondering what happened there. It's fine. Unimportant. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)