User talk:SkylarEstrada

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, SkylarEstrada! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Kj cheetham (talk) 10:17, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your welcome. I'm grateful for the greeting and happy to receive it. I'm looking forward to contributing to Wikipedia more in the coming future. SkylarEstrada (talk) 16:23, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Current events, 14/9/2023

I respect your consistent additions to CE, but this news item comes from an article/liveblog in May 2022, well over a year ago. While you should certainly keep contributing, please double-check your sources before you add them. The Kip 17:23, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for noticing and removing it. I'm not sure what happened or how I missed the fact that the date was inaccurate and from a year ago. From now on, I'll double-check the dates from my sources.

Thank you for restoring my other edit as well. Your diligent review of the entries is greatly appreciated. SkylarEstrada (talk) 18:09, 15 September 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.

In particular, be aware that any edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes or manually reverses other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. —Cryptic 00:25, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Current Events

Where does the source state that "Israeli forces has shelled Gaza’s largest hospital with white phosphorus"? Pg 6475 ^TM 04:45, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the entry time stamped 24h ago (09:45 GMT), titled Israeli army used white phosphorus on al-Shifa: Palestine health minister. SkylarEstrada (talk) 10:18, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide an alternate RS for that? Pg 6475 ^TM 10:24, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this source [1]. SkylarEstrada (talk) 10:33, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Says, "Last night Al Shifa hospital was air struck by, according to what they told us, white phosphorus.. " even the person in question does not himself say it happened. Claims made by each side on each other does not equate to a news piece. It should be confirmed that it indeed happened. Pg 6475 ^TM 10:48, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me where it says that liveblogs are not permitted as a source. Then information is still there permanently, just like any other article. SkylarEstrada (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TWITTER Pg 6475 ^TM 07:58, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you please just cite the standalone article instead of citing the AJ live blog, similar to the normal norm followed at CE? A notable event would definitely have a dedicated page, and just citing the live blog presents multiple problems. Pg 6475 ^TM 11:02, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this entry added by you, it cites a tweet from AJ Arabic. AJ Arabic is not an RS, and a tweet certainly not. Pg 6475 ^TM 10:46, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me where it says that claims must be "confirmed" before they are added. My understanding of policy is that claims can be added as long as they are reported by reliable sources. I'm not even sure how we can "confirm" a claim, being just editors on Wikipedia and not people at the site of the incident. SkylarEstrada (talk) 14:33, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't change the fact that AJ Arabic is not an RS. Moreover, in this revert you have completely reinstated claims from Anadolu Agency, which is not an RS, along with re-instating claims from AJ Arabic in your other reverts of mine, without prior discussing on the talk page, which is grave edit warring.

How do you justify keeping entries from Anadolu Agency? If you cannot, I request you to self-revert. Pg 6475 ^TM 07:20, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

source of your claim about WHO's report in Current Events Nov 12

You wrote 'The World Health Organization says that there are reports that people who fled Gaza’s[Al-Shifa hospital “have been shot at, wounded and even killed”'

I could not find that this is something the WHO reported in any of the references. Could you clarify where you got that from? 109.253.209.80 (talk) 07:26, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Correcting my quote. Your original quote is:

The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that people who fled the hospital "have been shot at, wounded and even killed" 109.253.209.80 (talk) 09:05, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Diff link:

https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1184774867 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.253.209.80 (talk) 07:26, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, in the original WHO report there is no mention of shooting those who are leaving: https://www.emro.who.int/media/news/who-loses-communication-with-contacts-in-al-shifa-hospital-in-gaza-amid-reports-of-attacks.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.253.209.80 (talk) 07:33, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the second source (Al Jazeera) cited for the item you mentioned. Please see the entry time stamped 12 Nov 2023 - 02:20 (02:20 GMT), titled Reports say people fleeing Al-Shifa Hospital shot and killed: WHO. SkylarEstrada (talk) 09:08, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The official WHO site states "There are reports that some people who fled..", unverified claims. At the CE only concrete events that happened and then covered must be included, and not mere claims. Also "There are reports that some people who fled.." means WHO is quoting other reports, so "WHO reports that people who fled.." is not actually reported by WHO. Also please do not cite the live blog as I've already stated above. Pg 6475 ^TM 10:35, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this discussion, where multiple editors thought the item was properly sourced and should be included. SkylarEstrada (talk) 14:37, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which users thought so?

109.253.209.80 (talk) 18:19, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The original WHO article carries the ultimate weight in this case. And the WHO did not verify the reports, only mentioning them.

It's worth noting that Al Jazeera has shown consistent bias in this conflict. They do not blatantly lie per se (at least not the English Al Jazeera), but they do write very misleading titles such as the one you quoted. It should be no surprise, as both Al Jazeera and Hamas are Qatar funded.

109.253.209.80 (talk) 18:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your claim about Israeli snipers is being disputed

Please see: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Portal_talk:Current_events/2023_November_13

-- 89.138.187.35 (talk) 04:25, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

For repeatedly edit warring, editing disruptively, refusal to hede advice, and repeatedly reporting editors for vandalism over content disputes, this block is indefinite. I'm willing to be convinced, but at present I do not think you are capable of editing constructively and collaboratively without wasting other editors' time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:43, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please clean up the sniping claim which isn't relying oN reliable sources? It was added by this iser today and I have no edit privileges to remove it. Please see here: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Portal_talk:Current_events/2023_November_13

-- 176.12.229.15 (talk) 16:35, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will do the needful. Pg 6475 ^TM 19:56, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]