User talk:92slim

This is my Talk Page. Please post content disputes in its correspondent article's talk page. Feel free to post any other inquieries here.

---

92slim, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi 92slim! 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 peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Dathus (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:10, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Amalek. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. Only notifying other editors of a dispute who have the same point of view as your own, as you did here and here, is improper "vote stacking" canvassing. If you are going to notify other users of a dispute, you need to either notify people of both points of view or, better, use a RFC to draw in editors of all persuasions. TransporterMan (TALK) 19:29, 22 February 2015 (UTC) PS: Since you're new here, please take the foregoing as just education, not a warning. I'm sure you didn't mean any harm by notifying those editors and in places other than Wikipedia it would have been understandable, fairly normal conduct. No real harm done this time, probably, but you can't do it any more. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 19:33, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. I am only starting to understand how to navigate these shores. --92slim (talk) 03:29, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Ebla

Have you read the article ? its nothing new actually, I just cut all the sections about the controversy and pasted them in one place. There is no theories, the article only give you a summary of what happened and the nature of the conflict ! you should read before getting aggressive.

I reverted your edit because we dont need a Wikipedia:Content forking--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that is what is been done in that article. Things being deleted and replaced is a way to fork content. --92slim (talk) 14:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

You want those informations to be mentioned in both articles !? when a subject is big enough, we create an article for it and add a summary in the main article. the controversy ,materials are big enough and a summary in Ebla tablets should be enough !--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 14:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The discussion is already going on in the Talk:Ebla tablets. The problem is that changing the content included in the source shouldn't be done. --92slim (talk) 14:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of State recognition (disambiguation)

A tag has been placed on State recognition (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
• disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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. LittleWink (talk) 18:20, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Re:Lavash

Hallo 92slim, thanks for writing! Unfortunately I have at present no time to join the discussion , since I am moving. :-( After having read the contributions, I think that the problem there is about the reliability of the given heterogeneous sources. About that, you could try to post a question to the Reliable sources Noticeboard. Alex2006 (talk) 08:30, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Merge opinion

What do you think about merging Malta exiles article with Effort to prosecute Ottoman war criminals? They're both practically the same info. Étienne Dolet (talk) 07:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Sameba

Sorry, I don't understand what you expect regarding the article. I don't edit regularly here anymore, but as I told you, I am available if you have any questions or worries regarding that article or related topics. What do you mean by "help with the article"? In my opinion, and as I wrote on the talk page, there are no major issues with it, even though the style could be improved here or there. What would your concerns be? In any case, I don't really know who's active these days in that area, I only remember Kober as an editor knowledgeable in Georgian topics and nice to work with. Hope that helps, and please follow up with me if you have more specific questions. Susuman77 (talk) 22:46, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

@Susuman77:I meant, with the report (from southcaucasus.com) that you have provided on the talk page - I apologize for the confusion. I will ask Kober if he could help with it. Thanks for your advice. --92slim (talk) 22:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

WP:ANI

Hi,

Posts at ANI are archived rather than being deleted so as to ensure that an acurate histroy of what has happened there is recorded. If youve made a post there and it no longer needs dealing with just mention that its dealt with and someone will close it down. Hope that makes sense. Let me know if you need any further clarification. Amortias (T)(C) 19:06, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry for that. Thank you, will do so from now on. --92slim (talk) 19:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish recognition of Armenian Genocide

Could you please show any source which could proof that Dilsa Demirbag Sten has said so. I didn't find any source neither clue that she said so.

Dear 86.50.111.163, I have included this source which you have said is an acceptable source for the article. I am not aware of this person but the source did exist at the time. If there is any problem, please let me know. --92slim (talk) 01:53, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Counter-insurgency. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

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.

In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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.

• Whether the article you refer to is a fork of another article is irrelevant to whether the material should be in this article or not. For that, you need to make you arguments on this article's talk page, you can't piggy back one on the other. Now please stop edit warring and discuss it on the talk page, as I asked you to before. BMK (talk) 01:21, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Armenian Genocide

Hi. I noticed your recent edit on the introduction to the Armenian Genocide article, consisting of the addition of the statement "some of them being spared by the intervention of Turkish intellectuals" to the paragraph concerning the deportation and execution of the said interlectuals. While this is probably correct (I haven't looked into this myself, though I believe you have), that paragraph is not the most appropriate place to include it, as it is dealing with the main facts of the events themselves in the context of the implementation of the genocide There is a section in the article that deals specifically with the deportation of the intellectuals, and if your fact regarding some Turkish intervention is not yet included, by all means do so there! Yours sincerely Aardwolf A380 (talk) 02:08, 16 May 2015 (UTC)