Anon551055
SCW&ISIL sanctions edit
Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, such as Issam Zahreddine, which you have recently edited. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.
General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. GreyShark (dibra) 22:06, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion edit
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. AntonSamuel (talk) 12:30, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Israeli contradiction edit
Unless a source explicitly talks about a "contradiction" we can not use that wording otherwise its considered unsourced original research (OR) and possibly a violation of WP: Synth which isn't allowed per WP policy. The current wording is appropriate. If you can find any sources that explicitly point out a contradiction in the claims or that cast doubt on Israel's claims I would gladly agree to including it in the text. EkoGraf (talk) 09:20, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
February 2018 edit
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.1RR edit
Please note - you are past 1RR at February 2018 Israel–Syria incident.Icewhiz (talk) 09:34, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
One of those was my own as I undid the wrong one Anon551055 (talk) 09:41, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
10 killed in Israeli strikes edit
The source is right there Anon551055. Read the Masdar report [1], a pro-Syrian government outlet that is citing a Syrian military source. Quote - "A Syrian Army source in Damascus told Al-Masdar that the Israeli airstrikes would result in the death of at least eight Syrian military servicemen and a couple of Iranian-backed Iraqi paramilitary personnel". Eight Syrian soldiers and a "couple" of Iraqi paramilitary translates to at least 10 per WP: CALC policy. Hope this clears it up. EkoGraf (talk) 03:13, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
February 2018 edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:22, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Anon551055 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I looked up sock puppet and it means make more then 1 account, I made some new accounts when I made a edit with my iP and forgot to sign in, I want to hide my IP so I pressed on the IP and it says make a account to hide IP(no option for use my account) so I made new account but it didnt hide, so I contacted the freenode chat and they removed the edit which was good. If you look at my other accounts I dont do any Disruptive or deceptive stuff, and the other accounts are all inactive and were a mistake. I know understand I will not make another account and If I forget my sign in I will contact here to undo the edit. Please Unblock Me I know understand and Will not let it happen, check my history for the accounts and you will see no disruptive or Deception. Thank you. Anon551055 (talk) 13:04, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I have verified that despite your claims, Forlwo23 (talk · contribs) was active and there's an overlap in editing on Issam Zahreddine. As such, your use of alternate accounts was in violation of WP:SOCK. Yamla (talk) 13:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Anon551055 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
For the Forlwo23, as I said, I made the account because the IP told me, then it didnt hide my IP, so I contacted the Freenode chat and they deleted the IP, I was already signed in Forlwo23 so I continued to edit with it on the page as I already made and was signed into that account, I have not used it after that and Dont want to use it after that, I dont think this breached any rules? as For the Kimo2255 account which was my second account, this was back a few months ago in December I think, I was new to Wikipedia and did not understand some rules, if you look at my edits in there, there is nothing deceptive about it, I made some edits and finished, I did not try to trick anybody or lie or anything, and I am sorry for not reading the rules before hand about Multiple accounts.
Decline reason:
Unfortunately, after around 3 weeks, no admin has felt that this request is convincing enough to unblock you. You are welcome to make another request - and you may want to review the guide to appealing blocks before doing so. Repeating this request may result in loss of access to this page. SQLQuery me! 03:27, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.