User talk:Hyperionsteel

Welcome!

Archives

1

My reason for making my edit is based on my reasoning in this comment, [1], which several other editors agreed with. There is a problem of employees of pro-Israeli organizations adding in pretty much every statement made by their organization to any and all relevant articles. If a second party is the source, then the statements made by the organization is notable, if not, and the source is primary, I think it deserves to be removed. Sepsis II (talk) 23:47, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't necessarily agree with you - statements from third parties are relevant. However, I won't press the issue for the time being.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 00:37, 12 June 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Igor Panarin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stephen Cohen (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) 10:59, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mira Nair may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• haifa-festival Mira Nair boycotts Haifa film festival] by Harriet Sherwood, ''The Observer'' (reprinted in ''[[The Guardian]]'', July 21, 2013.</ref><ref>[http://www.haaretz.com/culture/arts-

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:51, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Farag Foda may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Intellectual Farag Foda in 1992], MEMRITV.org, Clip No. 3926 (transcript), June 14, 2013. (video clip available [http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3926.htm here]</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hizb ut-Tahrir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daily Herald (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) 11:30, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Quds Day may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• in Canada: Shoot Israeli Jews if they don’t leave Jerusalem] by ''[[Jewish Telegraphic Agency]]'' (reprinted in the ''[[Haaretz]]'', August 5, 2013.</ref><ref>[http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:50, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Quds Day may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Leave Palestine and Then Start Shooting], [[MEMRI]], Clip No. 3942 (transcript), August 3, 2013. (video clip [http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/3942.htm available here]</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jennifer Loewenstein may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Now!|title=Casualties Mount in New Israeli Attack on Gaza<!-- Bot generated title -->}}</ref><ref>[http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/9168 The Pathology of Jewish Anti-Semitism [incl. Shlomo

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:13, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

   Thank you for trying to improve the Dab page Izumo. I am reverting your edits without discussing your summary comments individually, bcz you repeatedly changed entries with a blue link to add additional blue links in violation of the first few paragraphs of MOS:DABENTRY, and a number of your comments suggest that in general you were editing under the mistaken notion that a Dab is just a boring multitopic article.
   As WP:DAB and MOS:DAB make clear in great detail, a Dab is not an article at all, but merely a navigational device with the sole purpose of minimizing the frustration of users who have arrived at a page that is not an article on their topic of interest, because their reasonable hope about the title of the article covering that topic is either

1. primarily a title for another topic's article (e.g. typing "Hitler" in seeking the film of that name), or
2. a title for which there is no single article that would be on the desired topic, more than say 45% of the time that users try that title (as with "Izumo").

WP articles give information on their respective topics (and usually the more the better, to such an extent that we'll subdivide the topic into several articles when the amount of info at one page becomes ungainly). A dab "enriched" with any unnecessary information is like a red hexagonal sign reading "If you are in a vehicle, you are legally, morally, and for your own safety hereby required to bring your vehicle to a halt before any part of it reaches the intersection close beyond this sign, and.... If you are not in a vehicle ...."
   I will not at all be surprised if, after due attention to the official guidelines i've mentioned, you have some good ideas for improving this Dab, but for the moment you are too far off for me to efficiently separate such wheat from the chaff. If you find difficulty seeing how the guidelines apply to Izumo or other Dabs, WT:MOSDAB is a good place to get feedback from old hands. If you have a specific "why not do X with Izumo" question, don't rule our asking me at my user-talk page. (And i'll also watch your talk page for a week or so in case you respond to my message immediately following in this same section; it's usually good to keep a 2-way discussion in one place.)
   Thanks for reading this long comment, and thank you for showing interest in WP editing.
--Jerzy•t 07:14, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will likely revert some of your edits - your mass deletion of all the material I added (after you removed it without explanation) is rather excessive - separating "such wheat from the chaff" is a duty of all Wikipedia editors. As for your comments about how you think DAB pages are supposed to look, I will simply point out that similar DAB pages, such as Akagi, Church, System, Dreadnought for example, contain far more detail than what you deem to be acceptable (and have been in this configuration for quite some time). If you are correct in your view, than numerous DAB pages in Wikipedia will require an serious overhaul. For the time being, however, I am willing to meet you part of the way - I will agree to remove some of the material I added (the long list of locations is probably unnecessary and I will avoid adding additional links). Hopefully, we can come to a compromise.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 22:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC))[reply]

... as if you have overlooked the paragraph above your addition.--Asketix (talk) 20:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rengō Kantai Shirei Chōkan: Yamamoto Isoroku (2011 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hiroshi Abe (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) 11:35, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• of Windsor - Faculty of Law, February 11, 2011. Criminal Reports (6th), Vol. 79, p. 132, 2011. (available for download at Papers.ssrn.com, also available in PDF format here [http://ifls.osgoode.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:19, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Reconquista (Mexico) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• by Michelle J. Nealy, ''[http://diverseeducation.com/ DiverseEducation.com]'', November 20, 2007 (retrieved on December 6, 2010.</ref>
• html In Seach of Aztlán - José Angel Gutiérrez Interview], In Search of Aztlan, August 8, 1999 (retrieved on December 12, 2010.</ref>}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:03, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to American Studies Association may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• In response to the ASA's announcement, [[Jeffrey Klein], who is New York State Senate Co-leader and Assemblyman [[Dov Hikind]] have

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:54, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Robert Conroy may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * ''Liberty 1784: The Second War for Independence]]'', (2014) ISBN 978-1476736273, depicts the aftermath of a British victory in the [[American

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Canadian Arab Federation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Islamic Jihad (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) 09:00, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While it sounds like something American sailors would do, we really need better sourcing for this. Two self-published Web sites and The History Channel don't cut it. Does Morison mention it? Hammel? Lundstrom? --Yaush (talk) 17:18, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The History Channel Battle 360 series, which includes interviews with those who served aboard the Enterprise, is certainly sufficient (i.e. it does cut it). As for the authors you cited, I don't have their books in front of me, but I will look into them.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:11, 23 January 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Please have a look at Talk:Christians Against the Coup regarding the removal of the "Controversy" section. Regards.

Omar Othman 95 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anjem Choudary, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 05:53, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to First Student Canada may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• driver gets fired for picking up stranded kids in SUV] by Licia Corbella, ''[[Postmedia News]]'' (reprinted in the ''[[National Post]]'', March 5, 2014.</ref><ref>[http://www.calgaryherald.com/life/

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:52, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of fictional spacecraft may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)

Beck, ''The Animated Movie Guide'', [[Chicago Review Press]], 2005, (386 pages), pages 163-165 (available online at [http://books.google.ca/books?id=fTI1yeZd-tkC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f= [http://books.google.ca/books?id=fTI1yeZd-tkC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false Google Books]].</ref> Chôjikû Yôsai Macross] at IMDB.com.</ref><ref>[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088595/ Robotech (TV Series] at IMDB.com.</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:48, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Abbas Zaki may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Israelis So We Can Kill Them], [[MEMRITV]], Clip No. 4191 (transcript), March 12, 2014 (video clip [http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4191.htm available here).</ref><ref>[http://www.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:25, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful when citing certain sources - animenewsnetwork.com states very clearly at the bottom of the page "This encyclopedia is collaboratively edited by the users of this site", which is not a reliable source. As is the same for imdb.com a site which anyone can edit. Also note it is not necessary to put up 5 references (WP:Citation overkill) when one will do – Thanks FOX 52 (talk) 04:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen both of these sources used in numerous Wikipedia articles and most of the time nobody seems to care - but I will defer to your judgment on this for the time being. (Specifically, IMDB and ANN are cited in nearly every Anime article in Wikipedia - although now that I think about it, using these websites as references for the actual film/series may be fine, but citing them as references for spaceships that appear in the film/series might be a bit of a stretch).(Hyperionsteel (talk) 22:54, 12 March 2014 (UTC))[reply]

It's not about how many times you find these sources in articles - That just means no admin has had time to examine the reliability of these (references). Any source that is been edited or posted by regular folks has no validity, and therefore can not be used. Self-published sources will have more information on the subject - regards FOX 52 (talk) 04:09, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please visit the link. Sepsis II (talk) 19:53, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted my reply. I suggest you be more careful about making false accusations against me in the future.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 00:08, 18 March 2014 (UTC))[reply]

With regards to Sepsis II's allegation that I (by quoting a Canada.com article) was engaged in a plot to "purposefully misrepresent" CUPE's statement regarding its boycott of Israel (by using the quote that CUPE has voted to join the BDS movement "until that state recognizes the Palestinian right to self-determination", it turns out that CUPE uses this wording itself on its website CUPE Ontario's Resolution 50, and that this was the wording quoted by Canada.com. I guess the source was right after all - granted, this wording is from the introduction to this document, rather than from the actual resolution itself. It's also interesting to note that this document is currently available on the CUPE website, while Sepsis II could only cite an archived page.

It is certainly true that Sepsis II's wording was accurate. However, the wording I used was also accurate - but mine was more appropriate because it was cited by mainstream sources (which are preferred by Wikipedia whenever possible). In summary, Sepsis II's claim that the Canada.com article incorrectly quoted CUPE Ontario is clearly wrong, as is his eristic accusation that I "purposefully misrepresent[ed]" CUPE Ontario's stance on BDS.

I'm still waiting for an apology from Sepsis II for his false accusation that I tried to "purposefully misrepresent" CUPE's stance on BDS. Since you suggested that I be banned editing IP articles and asked for Arbitration Enforcement based on this lie, I think you owe it too me to admit that you messed up.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 05:01, 31 March 2014 (UTC))[reply]

As a result of an arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee has acknowledged long-term and persistent problems in the editing of articles related to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, broadly understood. As a result, the Committee has enacted broad editing restrictions, described here and below.

• Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
• The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.
• Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines.
• Discretionary sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently WP:AE), or the Committee.

These editing restrictions may be applied to any editor for cause, provided the editor has been previously informed of the case. This message is to so inform you. This message does not necessarily mean that your current editing has been deemed a problem; this is a template message crafted to make it easier to notify any user who has edited the topic of the existence of these sanctions.

Generally, the next step, if an administrator feels your conduct on pages in this topic area is disruptive, would be a warning, to be followed by the imposition of sanctions (although in cases of serious disruption, the warning may be omitted). Hopefully no such action will be necessary.

This notice is only effective if given by an uninvolved administrator and logged here. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:24, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• • For the record, I still believe that my editing was not in violation of Wikipedia rules or guidelines, as I indicated in my detailed point-by-point refutation of Sepsis II's accusations at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Hyperionsteel. However, since it appears this issue has been closed, I'm willing to move on.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 00:18, 19 March 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Hi, Hyperionsteel. You say "Combined Fleet" is the literal translation of the name of the film - it doesn't refer to the actual fleet. I'm awfully sorry but it does refer to the actual fleet since the abbreviation "lit." (which I didn't introduce myself in the article) points out the meaning of "Rengō Kantai", not the translation of the title. The title, in English-speaking countries, or, at least, in the USA, is The Imperial Navy. Sometime the term Rengō Kantai is also translated as "Grand Fleet". Check this link, and that one, for example. Kintaro (talk) 03:35, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. In this particular instance, "Combined Fleet" is the literal translation of the film's name - you don't link that to the Wikipedia article Combined Fleet because it doesn't refer to actual fleet. To put this in perspective: if the literal translation of the film's name was "United States Navy", you wouldn't link that to United States Navy.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 03:40, 20 March 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Maybe I can explain it better this way - in this case, "Rengo Kantai" is referring to the film Rengō kantai, not the actual fleet Rengō Kantai - so you wouldn't link it to the actual fleet. Likewise, you wouldn't link the literal translation of the film's name to Combined Fleet either.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 03:48, 20 March 2014 (UTC))[reply]

We disagree with each other, Hyperionsteel, but don't worry, I will not argue: do as you want. Regards! Kintaro (talk) 09:16, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Francis Boyle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Counterpunch (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) 08:52, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have come across you while editing "Proposed merge with G7" at G8 article. I need your opinion whether the following content is properly sourced. There is an editor disputing with here.EconomicTiger (talk) 07:08, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed you have contributed to the article of Yusuf al Qaradawi. I have been trying to restore a section from a POV and OR edit and partial blanking, which unfortunately uses a primary source to further the opinion/understanding of the user (who may be associated with Qaradawi). Attempts to refer to the wikipedia editing policies that are violated, have proven unsuccessful, as the user is unwilling to read or understand them. I support adding information, as long as it is covered by a reliable source (not onislam.net clearly), but not interpreting/synthesizing on behalf of readers or presenting to them "proof" or POV. Right now it reads like a blog post and not NPOV encyclopedic content. Seeing as you are an active and far experienced editor, could you look at it and weigh in? Best regards, Pray786 (talk) 09:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again - as the matter still persists and the user is now actively battling it in edit summaries and has removed himself from the talk page altogether, I am unsure as to how to proceed other than reverting him as OR still is not admissable. However, that seems futile as it has no effect. It is clear that he is persistant on having the OR based content inserted (he reverted back 3 times on 5th of April and twice today). Can you assist in the reporting as I am neither experienced nor familiar with that process. The user is not taking it seriously at all and I am concerned about that as it does not bode well. Pray786 (talk) 20:26, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've opened a section for this on the Wikipedia NOR noticeboard. Hopefully, we can get some input on this.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 02:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC))[reply]

I regret the delay in responding here as I have been preoccupied offline but many thanks for your help. Very appreciated as I am not very familiar with that yet. I just replied there and I too hope this will resolve things. Pray786 (talk) 01:05, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that I've started a section on the disagreement between us in the 'James Petras' talk section. My main point is that the allegations of anti-Semitism section should be about allegations by major organizations (or noted individuals). You can't simply include quotes directly from Petras with the justification that a Wikipedia editor thinks they show Petras's anti-Semitism. That is OR.Haberstr (talk) 18:31, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Duly noted. You are correct that a large portion of the information in that section was not cited/quoted (directly or indirectly) by the ADL. This should be corrected immediately. I'll have to keep an eye on that in the future.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 21:04, 24 May 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons. Thank you. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:41, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the material I've cited is the Dabashi article is from a reliable source. You are the one who insists that it isn't, but can't provide any evidence to support it. Please stop making ridiculous accusations such as this. I realize your are desperate to come up with new excuse to remove this material (since your attempt at BLPN failed), but surely you can do better.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:33, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. I am not referencing poorly sourced material. We have already established that the New York Sun is a reliable source. This material has been on this page for years and nobody has raised any liable or defamation concerns. Please stop harassing me with your false accusations and your self-righteousness. You failed at BLPN twice and now you are raising defamation claims? How much longer are you going to pursue this nonsense.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 05:19, 15 June 2015 (UTC))[reply]

So in addition to claiming (yet again) that I am misrepresenting Dabashi's writings (but providing no evidence to support your claims), now you are accusing me original research and suggesting that you will try to have me blocked from editing for defamation? If you had concerns that this material was libelous, why didn't you bring this up at the beginning (i.e. Why did you only invent this accusation once your attempts at BLPN failed to accomplish your goal). And why, despite it being posted on both website of the New York Sun as well as this Wikipedia article for several years at least, has it not been challenged earlier? Why are you only coming up with this now? Is it because your efforts at BLPN failed and you are looking for new excuse to have your way? Please stop disrupting Wikipedia, and please stop making false accusations against me. Are we going to have to discuss this on every noticeboard in Wikipedia before you will be satisfied?(Hyperionsteel (talk) 05:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC))[reply]

I noticed your recent edit and thank you for that. By the way, could I know how you found the source to appear like "propaganda front for the Iranian government?" Mhhossein (talk) 04:50, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look at the material and tone of ABNA's website (English version) (see: http://en.abna24.com/ ), which is hosted in Iran, it's difficult to conclude otherwise (since all media in Iran is heavily controlled by the government). Also, the organization that operates this website - the Ahl Al-Bayt World Assembly (also transliterated as the Ahlolbayt World Assembly), although officially an independent NGO, was originally established by the Iranian government. Looking closer, I suppose it's possible that the Ahlolbayt World Assembly is simply a very conservative Shia organization that operates with the blessing of the Iranian government.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 13:03, 20 August 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for your explanation. Any clue for all media in Iran is heavily controlled by the government. Mhhossein (talk) 06:40, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mhhossein:

• In support of my assertion that "all media in Iran is heavily controlled by the government", I can quickly point to the following links:
  • 2014 World Press Freedom, which is published by Reporters without Borders - you will note the map/list at the bottom which states that Iran is ranked 173 out of 180 in terms of press freedom.
  • 10 Most Censored Countries by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) - which lists Iran as the 7th most censored country in the world. Regarding Iran specifically, the CPJ states that:
    • "Iran, the seventh most censored country, has one of the toughest Internet censorship regimes worldwide, with millions of websites blocked; it is also the second worst jailer of journalists [after China], with 30 behind bars. Authorities there are suspected of setting up fake versions of popular sites and search engines as part of surveillance techniques."
    • "In Iran, journalists' relatives have been summoned by authorities and told that they could lose their jobs and pensions because of the journalists' work."
    • "The government uses mass and arbitrary detention as a means of silencing dissent and forcing journalists into exile."

I admit these links alone don't constitute an in-depth analysis, but they should at least demonstrate that my assertion isn't malarkey.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:02, 27 August 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Yes, an in-depth analysis is required. I saw many other developed countries down the bottom of the list. Mhhossein (talk) 04:29, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's no doubt that rigid control of the media is present in many countries. However, the fact that Iran is listed as 173 out of 180 by RWB, and that its repression of journalists is given special mention by CPJ, indicates that Iran's media is tightly controlled. If you can provide sources that indicate otherwise, I'd be happy to review them.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 06:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We are using the popular press. But IMO I think the large quotes are undue weight. Please get consensus on the talk page were the discussion is ongoing. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:57, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I felt the large quotes were necessary because they adequately articulate that this entire theory is no valid. However, after reviewing the comments on the talk page, I agree that the issue of UNDUE shouldn't be ignored. I've posted my two cents on the talk page and have replaced my earlier edit with a much smaller one. I welcome any comments you may have.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Caitlin Glass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heroic Age. 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) 10:13, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Francis Boyle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Infowars. 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) 09:25, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Miriya and Dana Sterling.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:40, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Max and Miriya on their wedding day.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]