User talk:BlancheX

Reservation Dogs

Hi BlancheX, your recent edits on Reservation Dogs are appreciated. You caught a couple of misused or misspelled words and corrected them. While you are likely correct that "selling" is a better word than "flogging" in that particular context (I had chosen it in order not to repeat "sell/selling" in the same sentence), you may be surprised to learn that "to flog" also means to sell. The English language is complex and fascinating ;) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flog – see definition 3b. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:12, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Try...

...to resist the urge to write stuff like this on talk pages. I assumed the difference between a national army and an armed Islamist group that routinely violates international law would be obvious to anyone. Either way, see below for the rules that apply to the topic area. Sean.hoyland (talk) 04:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PIA

Hi BlancheX! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community.

I've noticed that you've expressed an interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Unfortunately, due to a history of conflict and disruptive editing it has been designated a contentious topic and is subject to some strict rules.

The rule that affects you most as a new or IP editor is the prohibition on making any edit related to the Arab–Israel conflict, including discussing articles on talk pages, unless you are logged into an account and that account is at least 30 days old and has made at least 500 edits.

This prohibition is broadly construed, so it includes edits such as adding the reaction of a public figure concerning the conflict to their article or noting the position of a company or organization as it relates to the conflict.

The exception to this rule is that you may request a specific change to an article on the talk page of that article or at this page. Please ensure that your requested edit complies with our neutral point of view and reliable sourcing policies, and if the edit is about a living person our policies on biographies of living people as well.

Any edits you make contrary to these rules are likely to be reverted, and repeated violations can lead to you being blocked from editing.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Sean.hoyland (talk) 04:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
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 any 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.

Sean.hoyland (talk) 04:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Sean. It is not my goal to edit the page, but rather to inform the writers of the page that the information is biased, one-sided and does not show the whole picture. For some reason, people actually think that Hamas's goal is to create an independent Palestinian state when in fact their agenda is, and always has been, to destroy Israel, kill as many Jews as possible, and create an Islamic, state, which is against the will of the Palestinans. See below. Hamas does not care how many Palestinians suffer or die. Hamas thinks Palestinians should be *proud* to die for Hamas's ideology, which in fact is NOT Islamic. The Palestinian people find themselves in the grip of a terrorist group that has embarked on a strategy to get its own children killed in order to build sympathy for its cause. Yes, the Gazans elected Hamas to power in 2006; however, post-election polls indicate that Hamas’ victory is due largely to Palestinians’ desire to end corruption in government rather than support for the organization’s political platform. https://web.archive.org/web/20141220142322/http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/173.php#

End corruption? The Hamas Mafia. https://dianefrancis.substack.com/p/the-hamas-mafia

Claiming to perform an action "in the name of Islam" does not automatically make that action aligned with the principles and teachings of Islam; the action itself must be examined to see if it adheres to Islamic values and guidelines. https://muslimunitycenter.org/what-is-islam

Israel is not claiming to be doing anything in the name of Hashem. It is defending itself from its self-proclaimed enemies. That being said, I do not condone Israel's treatment of the Gazans who, just like everyone else, are trying to get through the day. As I said before, the Islamic Fatwa Council issued a fatwa against Hamas. “Hamas treats millions of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip inhumanely. Islam forbids supporting Hamas, joining Hamas and praying for Hamas!” “Hamas bears responsibility for the corruption and terror against Palestinian citizens in the Gaza Strip."

The Nakba was a real thing; so was the expulsion of Jews from Arab countries. https://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/news/the-expulsion-of-jews-from-arab-countries-and-iran--an-untold-history

Since 10/23 the belief that peace is possible has dwindled among Israelis and Palestinians.

Dim Outlook for Peace in the Middle East

Hopes for resolution, two-state solution equally low in Israel, West Bank and East Jerusalem. https://news.gallup.com/poll/650636/dim-outlook-peace-middle-east.aspx

ew opinion polls just released from Israel Democracy Institute and Tel Aviv University's Peace Index indicate that Israeli attitudes towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are more hawkish than at any point in recent memory. https://time.com/6333781/israel-hamas-poll-palestine/

"Shalom aleichem" is a Hebrew greeting that means "peace be upon you".

As-salamu alaykum is a greeting in Arabic that means 'Peace be upon you'.

Thank you. BlancheX (talk) 22:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]