Hosta

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:

• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• Simplified Manual of Style

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create an account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:

• Create new pages and rename pages
• Edit semi-protected pages
• Upload images
• Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed

If you edit without an account, your IP address (70.190.111.213) is used to identify you instead.

We hope that you choose to become a Wikipedian and create an account. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Happy editing! Tutelary (talk) 18:23, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Portal:Current events/2015 January 7  with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jim1138 (talk) 04:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC) [reply]

@Jim1138: The edit summary was "yesterday already noted", which seems a good enough reason for deleting an item from the daily news page. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:27, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My apology for the erroneous message and undoing your edit. Obviously, you did leave an edit summary and I missed it. Thanks, @John of Reading: for pointing this out! I'll see if I can fix my blunder.

Again, I apologize! Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:58, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor removed the ebola news. Fortunately, I didn't revert it. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 09:02, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Slvofjstce. I apologize if I've flouted any protocol, as I'm a new user. As a matter of fact, my desire to keep Wikipedia's current events portal neutral and credible is what moved me to create an account yesterday. I'm responsible for five or six of the edits on the Tel Aviv stabbing attack news piece from 22 Jan. (though I believe there at least two other users who have suggested similar edits for similar reasons): 01:03, 13:25, 17:02, 21:17, and 02:22 (23 Jan.).

I understand that Wikipedia's protocols encourage dialogue between editors rather than back-and-forth edit wars. I'm hoping we can civilly reach an understanding about a fair headline for the tragic attack.

The headline currently reads: "A Palestinian man from the West Bank, Hamza Muhammad Hassan Matrouk, illegally crosses into Israel for the express purpose to stab people attacking over a dozen Israelis on a bus in central Tel Aviv. Security forces capture the assailant as he continued to indiscriminately stab people in the street" (49 words).

My last suggested headline reads: "A Palestinian man from the West Bank stabs up to a dozen Israelis in Tel Aviv before being apprehended" (19 words). Both link to the same article.

I'm not the first to suggest more neutral, accurate, and concise ways of rendering the headline.

The man's name, the adverb "illegally," the detail of him crossing into Israel, and his "express purpose" (never actually revealed in the article) contribute nothing to a headline's goal of providing basic, neutral information the reader can then choose to read more on. The detail of him "continu[ing] to indiscriminately stab people in the street" I also feel is superfluous to the headline which, in both cases, has already revealed he stabbed up to a dozen Israelis (not "over": that's patently contradicted by the article).

All told, I feel my suggestion provides all the same essential information in a concise, neutral way that the current headline does not achieve.

I hope we can productively engage on this and come to a reasonable agreement. I hope you can get back to me by 06:00GMT.Slvofjstce (talk) 21:54, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I had hoped we could speak before now. I've just gone ahead and added my revision. I hope we can either let the issue rest, or reason things forward from here. Peace. Slvofjstce (talk) 06:11, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Portal:Current events/2015 January 21, you may be blocked from editing. Slvofjstce (talk) 18:00, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slvofjstce (talk • contribs) 06:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, 70! Looks like you're online. Would you be willing to discuss Slvofjstce's content dispute and/or the ANI investigation about it? I've taken a look through your contribs, and it looks like you're a great asset to WP; however, I think there are a few misunderstandings about the user conduct guidelines which need to be worked out. Best, FourViolas (talk) 17:56, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that! But my error just now at Portal:Current events/2015 January 12 would not have happened if you'd used an edit summary. Also, when reviewing the list of recent Portal edits I haven't yet learned to recognise your IP address. I second the suggestion, further up this page, that you register with a named account. Then I could easily skip past your edits, knowing that they need no review. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:15, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My removal of the Oscars was not unwarranted, I listed perfectly good reasons for the removal and my rationale does meet wikipedia standards. For one, it isn't January 15 in Los Angeles Right now, two, it hasn't happened yet, and three, the the even itself is notable but it is unnecessary to list that it will happen, when it does happen then of course, add it. All you have to do is wait until the oscar announcements actually happen and then put them up, patience is a virtue, embrace it. - SantiLak (talk) 06:24, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. TheMagikCow (talk) 14:32, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

you a bot right? - or you are the vandal that is socking for the 76 ip anon which is it cause that page you say i am a disruptor for has a vandal who keeps adding something that multiple editors removed as failing notabi9lity - thus since your acct was just created (July 2014 = just 6 monuths) i am almost sure you are just the same guy and a sock!--70.190.111.213 (talk) 14:35, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Portal:Current events/2015 January 25. Donner60 (talk) 04:54, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

not exactly sure what you are saying - i had a typo where i left out the letter "n" and now you are threatening me with some type of action over a typo???--70.190.111.213 (talk) 05:09, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

also if i am not mistaken it is considered a violation of wiki rules to call someone a vandal - a typo most certainly does not rise to wilfull destruction of wiki thus the mirror seems now to fall on you--70.190.111.213 (talk) 05:16, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with 70.190.111.213 here—the edit did look like a test in the blinkered view of Huggle (it replaced real words with "wis", which is the kind of thing new users often do when getting used to editing), but was nevertheless on the way to improving the entry. This WP:WikiGnome work is so helpful that I'd like to think 70.190.111.213 is the kind of good-faith editor who would be willing to discuss the ANI incident, in the interest of not being blocked from making good edits like this.

(Also, please WP:AAGF and don't violate WP:ATWV or WP:DBQ yourself.) FourViolas (talk) 05:49, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: your question. I was blocked for reverting a few edits by an anti-Semitic far-left European propagandist who calls himself "Zero0000." He is essentially a single-purpose account whose only purpose on Wikipedia is to demonize Israel, but because he is an administrator he can get away with pretty much anything. I also try to revert edits by other anti-Semites like User:Nishidani, User:RolandR, User:Supreme Deliciousness, User:Huldra, User:Malik Shabazz, User:Sean.hoyland, User:Carolmooredc, and several other Israelophobic European/Muslim propagandists. For this reason, the corrupt anti-Semitic Wikipedia administration (which is also anti-Israel) has declared me "enemy of the state": troll, vandal, disruptive sock, and any other nonsensical Wikipedia terminology they can come up with, with no proof for any of these accusations, of course. And they also love to slander me by making false accusations of "they are racist, often contain libelous or derogatory statements as well as other obscenities." They delete all my edits purposefully so people can't see they are lying through their teeth about me, or they are actually retarded and believe accusing anti-Semites of anti-Semitism is racist and libelous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.123.253.84 (talk) 08:01, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

not that i believe you but i will remember your statements which is all you can expect.--70.190.111.213 (talk) 12:01, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This IP is JarlaxleArtemis. He's graduated from being a Dungeons and Dragons and Harry Potter fanatic to being an alleged pro-Israel activist (actually, he's just picked a cause-of-the-day which allows him to indulge his true passion of posting anonymous hate messages and death threats to anyone who disagrees with him. NawlinWiki (talk) 14:09, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

i will remember your statements which is all you can expect--70.190.111.213 (talk) 14:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@NawlinWiki: Just to clarify, you mean that 124.123.253.84 is a JA sock, not 70.190.111.213? If so, should I tag his talk page with {{IPsock|JarlaxleArtemis}}? FourViolas (talk) 17:47, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

lol--70.190.111.213 (talk) 17:50, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I mean that 124.123.253.84 is Jarlaxle. Not much point tagging, though - it's an open proxy, which is pretty much exclusively what Jarlaxle uses these days. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:53, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. —George8211 / T 18:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you just made 20 consecutive "undo" edits at Terry Carter. This clutters the page history. Please take a look at Help:Reverting#Manual_reverting for a better way to re-instate an earlier version of a page. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:46, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring at Terry Carter and Portal:Current events/2015 January 29. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Bbb23 (talk) 02:34, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Ah, Dawn. I see you have been trying to add content and I appreciate that, as does everyone. However, the style of the content you have been trying to push – the one which you have reverted me twice for – does not belong in the article. I have checked the source and verified everything you added but it is a blatant copy/paste with only superficial modifications, not a thorough and comprehensive paraphrase and copyedit (which I did). So for the interest of the readers, @Drbogdan: (who happened to agree with me) and the community in general, leave my contributions as they are, they look better than your initial additions. Parcly Taxel 23:30, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

i have paraphrased and properly cited any direct quotation--70.190.111.213 (talk) 23:32, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Parcly Taxel is saying you violated copyright. This can get a lot of people into a lot of trouble. Cut it out. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 07:36, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Portal:Current events/2015 February 23 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
diffs: [1] [2] [3] [4] FourViolas (talk) 14:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

and again a sock enters my page - now i wonder if you are just that same sock again as before - now just using SWWWWWWWWWlllll as one of your many endless rotating IPs--70.190.111.213 (talk) 14:33, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

and you know what i am sure you are just the same sock - how do i know this time? - the three revert should have been evenly applied to the other guy who just dug up an article from January to change - but did you apply a three revert to their talk page? - no you did not - why? - cause you are just the same person socking!--70.190.111.213 (talk) 14:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]