User talk:2A1ZA

2A1ZA, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi 2A1ZA! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Samwalton9 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello 2A1ZA, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Rojava has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 21:20, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016

Your addition to Human rights in Rojava has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without 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 violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. GAB^gab 14:57, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

This "Historic Background" section I made in the Human Rights in Rojava article was copy & paste from the (longstanding) former version of the "Modern History" section in the Rojava article (which I did neither write nor ever edit), which I then made much briefer. In the "Historic Background" section I made in the Human Rights in Rojava article, I did only write the first sentence new. Please look at the history of the articles concerned and at the talk pages. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 15:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Alright, I see now. Thank you for responding and clarifying the situation. GAB^gab 15:47, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. If you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 20:35, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Rojava

Please stop accusing me of vandalism. I am not vandalising the page Rojava. There is a content dispute and you seem very, very angry about it based on your reaction to the dispute but falsely accusing people of vandalism can get you in trouble, see Wikipedia:Disruptive user:

The following items are some examples which would make someone a disruptive user:

1. Creating disturbances on featured article candidate pages, e.g. objecting just to object
2. Continuously listing articles at Articles for deletion as an attempt to insult those who have worked on or contributed to the pieces
3. Calling users names or referring to articles that the user has worked on in a derogatory manner
4. Posting rumors or lies about other Wikipedia users, such as false accusations of vandalism
5. Leaving hostile messages on a user's talk page, or attacking a user for items discussed with a third party on their talk page

Ogress 17:37, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Indeed I am angry about what you did to that article, as I had put quite some effort into contributing to make that fragmented place of warfare between various political agendas and various ethnic or religious supremacist attitudes a meanwhile pretty good article. Please focus on the discussion on the talk page of the article. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 18:22, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at Talk:Rojava, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. After I laid out here that our issue was a content dispute and that calling valid editing you disagree with "vandalism" could have serious repercussions, you immediately again referred to my edits as "vandalism". Ogress 20:46, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Please focus on the discussion on that talk page. It is not about personal attacks but about arguments for a good article. And I would very much appreciate if you follow the arguments and revert deletions/edits you made in that article if you find from the discussion that it would be appropriate to do so. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 21:23, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

By the way, I did not use this v-word, after asked not to, to describe your deleting the substantial content of an entire section without discernable reason, arbitrarily changing elementary terminology in some places of the article but not in others, thus creating confusion about central issues. Dear Ogress, there is no reason not to focus on the arguments and on the article. If you are so not happy with things I had written about your edits there, I will happily go through it and consider removing, when this is an article without internal contradictions again. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 21:38, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

It's super convenient that you can insult me and then say "stop focusing on the things I said and work on the article". Repeatedly. Ogress 22:04, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I did not and do not "insult" you, I am arguing for a good article. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 22:14, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

You have called me a vandal repeatedly. Ogress 22:32, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I never said anything about your person, even less did I call you names, what I did and do talk about are your devastating edits to that article. Please learn the difference. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 10:25, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kurdish–Turkish conflict (2015–present), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page HDP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Syrian People

Read here. Understand what a consensus is. When you want to make a controversial edit, its you who should go to talk first. Not make your edit then defend it asking others to use the talk page.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 02:33, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Category Rojava is a big scam. Most of the cities/villages under Kurdish YPG military occupation are inhabited by Arabs, therefore your rojava category does not even apply. The control of thoise areas changes from day to another as a result of the ongoing civil war. More important is the fact that this rojava thing does not have ay reccognition, by syrian government, opposition, or international community. Therefore, no communities should be added to that category, and this would be classified as Wikipedia:OR. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 10:52, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Please take a look at the list of populations centers under Rojava control at the Rojava article, control over none of these has been lost after having been won. And Rojava is a polyethnic polity, it does not matter how the distribution of ethnicities in those cities/towns is. If you wish to perceive Rojava as, "Kurdish YPG military occupation", you are free to do so, but then at least accept that "Kurdish YPG military occupation" is a fact where it is a fact and stop that deleting of the respective category in the respective articles. By the way, the text of each and every of these articles on the locations concerned explicitly states that they are under Rojava administration. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 12:39, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kurdish–Turkish conflict (2015–present), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AKP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Tel Abyad

Acting like you own a page isnt the way to go dear ferakp (not waiting for you to deny, I just dont have the will or time to do a suck puppet investigation) You removed whatever you want and kept what you find suitable... this cant happen. Either restore the page to what it was or go to the talk page.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 12:56, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I really tried to avoid this headache. you seems not to understand that you dont decide what is neutral, what is suitable, what is supremacist...etc

I have enough evidence to prove you are ferakp. I just didnt want to get you blocked, yet you insist on this behavior. who told you you can delete all this material and decide to keep the 45% calling it neutrality ?? Tel abyad is back to the way it was before you butchered it. You will go against the consensus that we have in the talk page if you reverted since Ermanarich also agree that your deletions are not justified.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 13:03, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Please stop this nonsense. I am not interested in your quest for Arab supremacism, and I am not interested in your petty fights with whomever about them. If you continue slander on this page, I will take care that your stint at Wikipedia is over. If you want to talk to me, talk about how to improve articles on the talk pages of the respective articles. Discussion here is over for me. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 13:11, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

"I will take care that your stint at Wikipedia is over" oh wow. lets see.

Tell then, stop acting as if you own any page and use the talk pages before removing contents and decide what is neutral and what it not.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 13:15, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Foreign relations of Rojava, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Democratic Union Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Democratic Union Party (Syria)

Hello 2A1ZA,

could you maybe take a look at the PYD's Wikipedia page? It's being vandalized by the same IP as the Rojava page and I have currently not enough time to act against it further. I'll revert these edits there now, but I can't look if he reverts it again. Maybe, a block request for this IP would be the right way to deal with it.

Kind regards,Ermanarich (talk) 19:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello (Redacted), please show proof of your accusations or keep silent, for good. -78.171.140.252 (talk) 18:13, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 25 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Jazira Canton page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (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, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Democratic Union Party (Syria)

Hi, by undoing the referenced info on this terrorist, at best militant, organisation you have also removed a whole sentence on Salih Muslim's Twitter message that is all over the internet, and which I had referenced from three different reliable sources. I do not believe this was done negligently as I believe you act partially in this regard. Yes, this article needs to be protected from biased editors, whomever they may be. This would also entitle it to include correct reliable information that reflects the whole truth about the subject. Thank you. -78.171.140.252 (talk) 18:09, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I apprectiate that in spite of your self-declared affiliation with the totalitarian political ideology of Islamism you only harass me on Wikipedia rather than outright seeking my beheading as a secular person. However, discussions on articles should be done on the talk pages of the articles, so that everyone can follow them. Anyway, I do not think that a tweet by Mr Salih Muslim is appropriate to figure with an own sentence in the article on that political party. You might wish to try the article on Salih Muslim, if at all. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 18:16, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

You and the likes of you racist xenophobes are the ones who support such terrorist organisations found by your Obama administration and his puppets in Europe. Even the clown Trump said it. Yes I am a proud Muslim who belongs to the most merciful religion on earth, since the rest are bankrupt ideologies and isms that have not been able to provide peace and justice, but have only made slaves of people with a wild capitalist New World Order. Thank you for clarifying to an uninformed user about where a sentence belongs' even though I disagree with you because the person in question is the head of that terror organisation! You are still liable for your wrong action. -78.171.140.252 (talk) 18:31, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I do not care about your personal religion, that is your business, and I kindly ask you to no longer speculate in article pages about mine. The reference here was to a totalitarian political ideology, Islamism. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 18:35, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Rojava

Dear Incompetent Wikipedian, Your claim for undoing my revision that "the referenced sources do not support the bold factual claim" is only an excuse. It is a lie. Why would anybody add unsupportive references? Just because you do not want to see some facts does not make them nonexistent. You and the likes of you Islamophobes have turned Wikipedia into your playground. Wikipedia is dead because of you. This will remain a blot on your record. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.171.140.252 (talk) 18:24, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

No, actually it won't, and any further personal attacks of this nature are likely to end in increasing difficulties for you ( 78.171.140.252 ) editing Wikipedia. MPS1992 (talk) 18:41, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Of course it would not, considering you might be another member of the club who gets paid from the Wikipedia Foundation. Any personal attacks on my contributions will be met with an equal personal attack. -78.171.140.252 (talk) 22:04, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Personal attacks are bad, whether in retaliation or otherwise, and I am trying to assist you ( the person who posted the above comment from 78.171.140.252 ) in continuing to edit Wikipedia. Sadly, I don't receive any pay from the Wikimedia Foundation, and I am about 100% sure that 2A1ZA does not either. MPS1992 (talk) 22:33, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

If I would receive a cheque from the Mossad every time I am accused to be paid by it, I would own a generous estate in Saint-Tropez by now. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 22:37, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

But why are Mossad interested in Rojava? As those of us from "the subcontinent" learn to say, "I don't get it!" MPS1992 (talk) 22:47, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Imputations about users and their motivations

Hello, I have a request which is related to some of the above arguments. When reverting an editor, or in fact in any edit, please could you avoid using wording like "Dear islamist user with the Istanbul IP address 78.171.130.160, please stop the edit warring". The part to which I object is identifying the other editor as an "Islamist". This is an incitement for opposing editors to then start commenting on your supposed views or affiliations, which of course they proceeded to do. All of this falls into personal attacks territory. Mentioning their location and IP address was also unhelpful, but that is not the main problem here.

I am prepared to intervene when personal attacks are disruptive, but I would hope to see a constructive approach on both sides. MPS1992 (talk) 22:45, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Oh, and the first sentence of this was not OK either, and provoked the expected response. Do you see what I mean? MPS1992 (talk) 22:51, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I do not usually talk like this to other users, this anonymous account edit-warring to the extreme, insulting everybody (including me) and proclaiming on the talk page that "Shariah law is the only valid law in the sight of God" (which is the definition of Islamism) was a case where I wanted to make obvious to other editors that this is a disruptive user. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 01:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

General sanctions notice

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. 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.

Katie^talk 23:36, 29 August 2016 (UTC)