Another restriction by this same arbitration committee ruling is that editors with fewer than 500 edit, like you, are prohibited from editing any page that could be reasonably construed as being related to the Arab–Israeli conflict per WP:ARBPIA3#500/30. Your editing of the Ali Hassan Salameh entry of the Red Prince disambiguation page falls under " being related to the Arab–Israeli conflict " , so you may not edit that. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
- The page is not locked. Go play somewhere else vandal.Gahgeer (talk) 19:43, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
- Pages do not have to be locked to be under this sanction - you may not edit any article reasonably construed as being related to the Arab–Israeli conflict per WP:ARBPIA3#500/30. If you keep it up, you'll be reported and blocked. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 19:50, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
- Seriously who are you exactly? Stop it with your Tendentious Editing. My correction was in line with factual history. The Red Prince was based in Lebanon and barely took any role in armed action. His alleged connection with the Black September has been denied by the man who created Black September (Abu Dawud or Abu Daoud) in "Palestine de Jérusalem à Munich De Abou Daoud", Anne-Carriére, Paris 1999. In any case you can't use a dismabiguation page to add your subjective point of view.
- I am an editor, much like you. But unlike you, I have more than 500 edits, which means the restrictions I pointed you to do not apply to me, and my edits were neither vandalism nor tendentious - they are simply enforcing Wikipedia policy and ArbCom ruling. Whether or not your edits were good, or correct, or an improvement to the article is entirely beside the point - you are simply not allowed to edit those articles, and there is to exception for "good" edits. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 20:39, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
- If you were here before me, then it doesn't mean you know more about the subject. You need to look rationally at three issues: 1) It is a disambiguation page so it's not locked or necessarily pertain to the Pal/Israel conflict. 2) Even so, calling someone a terrorist is a great subjective treatment. Even Osama Bin Laden's page doesn't call him a terrorist. 3) The title I added (commander) was taken straight from Red Prince's own page. Therefore kindly address these points instead of relying on how long you've been around which is of no relation to the issue at hand. Failing to do so I'll report you for bullying. I didn't do anything wrong here. Gahgeer (talk) 21:20, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
- I never said I know more about the subject than you, because that is entirely irrelevant. You are simply not allowed to edit any article related to the conflict - and that includes entries in disambiguation pages that are related to the conflict. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 23:39, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
- If you were here before me, then it doesn't mean you know more about the subject. You need to look rationally at three issues: 1) It is a disambiguation page so it's not locked or necessarily pertain to the Pal/Israel conflict. 2) Even so, calling someone a terrorist is a great subjective treatment. Even Osama Bin Laden's page doesn't call him a terrorist. 3) The title I added (commander) was taken straight from Red Prince's own page. Therefore kindly address these points instead of relying on how long you've been around which is of no relation to the issue at hand. Failing to do so I'll report you for bullying. I didn't do anything wrong here. Gahgeer (talk) 21:20, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
- I am an editor, much like you. But unlike you, I have more than 500 edits, which means the restrictions I pointed you to do not apply to me, and my edits were neither vandalism nor tendentious - they are simply enforcing Wikipedia policy and ArbCom ruling. Whether or not your edits were good, or correct, or an improvement to the article is entirely beside the point - you are simply not allowed to edit those articles, and there is to exception for "good" edits. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 20:39, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
- Seriously who are you exactly? Stop it with your Tendentious Editing. My correction was in line with factual history. The Red Prince was based in Lebanon and barely took any role in armed action. His alleged connection with the Black September has been denied by the man who created Black September (Abu Dawud or Abu Daoud) in "Palestine de Jérusalem à Munich De Abou Daoud", Anne-Carriére, Paris 1999. In any case you can't use a dismabiguation page to add your subjective point of view.
- Could you please stop telling me what I can or can't do? I haven't broken any rules. You fail to address any of the points I raised. You just like to bully new users. But I'm going to break it to you: I'm not leaving. Gahgeer (talk) 00:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
you actually did break a rule - a rule that says that editors like you (with less than 500 edits) can't edit articles related to the conflict. I pointed you to that rule, several times now.I am not telling you to leave - I am telling you that if you continue to edits such articles you will be reported and blocked. You are free to edit other articles, until you accumulate the needed number of edits, JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 00:20, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
- You are a Wikibully. I didn't break any rule. You are meanwhile breaking the following rules:
- Making "no-edit" orders contrary to policy by creating a false rule on an article that is not part of policy, Making a False accusations by saying I broke the rules and Wikihounding as shown in your behaviour where you went to each and every article I improved to stalk me. I will actually report you. You either get an admin involved or leave me alone.Gahgeer (talk) 00:33, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search