User talk:Mark28482

October 2023

Welcome to Wikipedia. Editors are expected to treat each other with respect and civility. On this encyclopedia project, editors assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not appear to do at Talk:October 2023 Gaza−Israel conflict. Here is Wikipedia's welcome page, and it is hoped that you will assume the good faith of other editors and continue to help us improve Wikipedia! Thank you very much! AntiDionysius (talk) 22:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

which do you refer to specifically? Mark28482 (talk) 22:13, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"he is a terrorist apologist and/or terrorist sympathizer and Wikipedia allows these people to spread their poison all over the web." AntiDionysius (talk) 22:16, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i stand by my words, no offense meant. this person acted in such a way that this statement was appropriate and correct by the definitions of the word. I appreciate your concern, but we must not allow people like to spread their poison - it is our responsibility as members of the free world to stand up for all humans and protect innocent people from injustice. Mark28482 (talk) 22:20, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not "concerned", I'm telling you that what you did is a violation of Wikipedia policy. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:22, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

why are you telling me this if you are not concerned? Mark28482 (talk) 22:24, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To inform you that if you violate Wikipedia policy repeatedly, your account may be blocked. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:29, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

why are you informing me is what i dont understand. who are you? Mark28482 (talk) 22:40, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm informing you because it's useful information for you to have. That's how Wikipedia works. When people do things that contravene policy, someone puts a note on their talk page informing them, so they have the opportunity to avoid such issues in future. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:42, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

did you put such a note on the pages of people who defended, justified and celebrated these attacks? Mark28482 (talk) 22:44, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a specific violation of Wikipedia policy you're concerned about, I would be happy to take a look at it. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:45, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

go ahead and read the comments which i responded to, most notable the terrorist apologist and sympathizer called Abo Yemen who justified and called the attacks against civilians, women and children, as acceptable. I am surprised you felt the need to lecture me, but not this individual. I find this to be very peculiar, maybe you have personal motives for this?

After reading this comment, I dare you to condemn these attacks. Mark28482 (talk) 17:39, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mark28482 I won't condemn the attacks. You have no right to change my political opinions Abo Yemen✉ 17:42, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

do you feel the attacks were justified and acceptable since you refuse to condemn them? Mark28482 (talk) 17:48, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mark28482 judging by the fact that the Israelites have been doing the exact same thing to the Palestinians for decades, then yes i do feel that the attacks were justified and acceptable Abo Yemen✉ 18:11, 9 October 2023 (UTC) Mark28482 (talk) 22:55, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which Wikipedia policy are you concerned this comment is in violation of? AntiDionysius (talk) 22:59, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

figure it out, you are an adult. Mark28482 (talk) 23:03, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am, and I cannot identify a policy this appears to be in violation of. That would be why I didn't put a note on that user's talk page. AntiDionysius (talk) 23:05, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

this sounds very "convenient" for you, doesn't it? Mark28482 (talk) 23:06, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you can identify a policy which it is in breach of, please let me know. AntiDionysius (talk) 23:10, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

sadly i do not wish to speak to you any more. i strongly believe your motives are not noble ones and you are acting in bad faith. Mark28482 (talk) 23:12, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When I ask you for specific policy violation, it's suddenly "figure it out yourself" or "I do not wish to speak to you any more". That sure is convenient! AntiDionysius (talk) 23:14, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, the point of this was to tell you there exists an obligation to be civil to other editors. If you think others have breached this or any other Wikipedia policy, you are of course welcome to report the issue. AntiDionysius (talk) 23:15, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you can find it yourself, you found the one to cry to me to, yourself...didnt you? Mark28482 (talk) 23:16, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I share your feeling that Abo Yemen's comments aren't acceptable, but in order to take action, we need to identify a policy the comments breaks. He asked you to provide one and you didn't. WP is based on collaboration and so he was asking for your help in ID'ing the policy. And, if there isn't an existing policy it violates, there is the chance to propose one here Yr Enw (talk) 12:55, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i dont really knoiw how to use this interface and i dont really have the time to learn it, perhaps you could do it because it is very very unacceptable behavior. Mark28482 (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did flag it to an admin Yr Enw (talk) 18:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i also reported it, but to wikipedia this type of stuff appears to be morally, ethically and socially acceptable which is why i am going to boycott wikipedia for not being impartial at all. Mark28482 (talk) 20:09, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an 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.

O3000, Ret. (talk) 01:07, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to leave you the same notice. Attacking other editors with stuff like "How delusional and sick are you in the head?" is a very fast road to being topic-banned or just blocked entirely from editing. Doubly so, because the Wikipedia Manual of Style is itself a "contentious topic", so you are attacking other editors in two contentious topics simultaneously. Standard notice about that:

You have recently made edits related to the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy. This is a standard message to inform you that the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy 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.

— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 17:46, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for using Wikipedia as a political forum and battleground. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:11, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #79749

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:42, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]