User talk:Super ninja2

October 2022

Your edit to Bureaucracy has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 22:53, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

November 2022

Your edit to Software engineering has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Do not copy material published elsewhere into Wikipedia. Wikipedia must be very careful about copyright violations! StarryGrandma (talk) 18:08, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bureaucracy in the United States

The article Bureaucracy in the United States has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG. Sources don't mention "the Federal Bureaucracy" as a separate entity but just use it to describe the Executive Branch and only give it a passing mention. Content in this article is explained in Federal government of the United States. Plagued with original research.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Quaemenelimbus (🗨 here) ^_^ 22:47, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Bureaucracy in the United States for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bureaucracy in the United States is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bureaucracy in the United States until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Quaemenelimbus (🗨 here) ^_^ 01:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

An article you made was deleted

An article you made, Bureaucracy in the United States, has been deleted as the result of a deletion discussion. If you think this deletion was in error, please make a request for a deletion review. Before making a deletion review request, please review the reasons to request a review. Quaemenelimbus (🗨 here) ^_^ 14:39, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Deep state

Hi, there. I repost it again here, because you may not read it. It is a term historical first used in Turkey (Turkish: derin devlet) → Deep state in Turkey, really visibel with the Susurluk scandal in 1996, as part of "Turkish Gladio"... The term stands for a barely transparent structure that would be called a clandestine (secret and illegal) "state within a state". It is a network of security forces ("Intelligence" for the clandestine acquisition of information, or as Military intelligence), the judiciary, politics, administration and the underworld (as Organized crime, drugs, human trafficking). Fassadendemokratie is a German term for it. For an academic read: Peter Dale Scott - a former Canadian diplomat and poet, has written many important books on the CIA and the "deep state," including:

• a.) Deep Politics and the Death of JFK (University of California, 1993);
• b.) The War Conspiracy: JFK, 911, and the Deep Politics of War. rev. (Skyhorse, 2008);
• c.) The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire and the Future of America;
• d.) American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan (Rowman & Littlefield, 2010);
• e.) The American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil, and the Attack on U.S. Democracy. (Rowman & Littlefield, 2017).

and

• f.) Mike Lofgren, The Deep State: The Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow Government, published on January 5, 2016.

and

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yf978q67pQs Whitney Webb: How Government Steals From Us, Bombshell Epstein Book
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdV_c0ihXkU Whitney Webb: National Security State, Surveillance & Blackmail - Cheers

91.54.0.143 (talk) 18:07, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! The★Super★ninja2 (talk) 08:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

De rien, avec plaisir :-) --87.170.203.31 (talk) 11:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Notice

You have recently made edits related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe. This is a standard message to inform you that the Balkans or Eastern Europe 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. Acroterion (talk) 04:42, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Repeated edit warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Fascism. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jeppiz (talk) 10:45, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adnan Ibrahim, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kaffir.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Redirecting

The current page for the attack is at Al Ahli Arab Hospital airstrike, as it is larger and better developed. Please don't turn it into a redirect without further discussion. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 18:19, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

October 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. "Don't take the decission by yourself without asking for a consensus!" As it stood, the discussion was nine opposes to two supports. If anyone's going against consensus, it's you. The Kip 19:52, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

• Dude, at least move the page back instead of just blanking and leaving a redirect Inception. AryKun (talk) 19:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

@The Kip Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.You're advising me to be " familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines" whereas you don't know that a consensus is NOT a vote count. So, let me advise you to recheck your information before warning other users. ☆SuperNinja2☆ 21:13, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Besides vote totals, the oppose votes detailed reasons why, going by WP policy, the article title shouldn't be changed to "massacre." Meanwhile, you and the lone supporter argued it should be moved to "massacre" effectively because "it was." Consensus against the move existed, whether you like it or not. The Kip 21:37, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

@The Kip Here we go, backpedaling. You litteraly said "the discussion was nine opposes to two supports". ☆SuperNinja2☆ 21:44, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

October 2023

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion, you may be blocked from editing. The Kip 19:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

I'll second that, WP:IDHT refers. Best call it a day and just wait for developments.Selfstudier (talk) 20:37, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

@Selfstudier You CANNOT silence me if you don't like my edits. ☆SuperNinja2☆ 20:47, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

That's not what I am doing. Selfstudier (talk) 20:48, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

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.