User talk:Csi.southpark

In this edit you restored unsourced content and content from a blog that does not comply with

Sean.hoyland If you think that you can find a better source then by all means add it. That fact is the information is true and the article distorts facts without it and I'm pretty sure that threatening someone is more "belligerent."

Read

WP:BURDEN and comply with policy. If you do not comply with policy in the topic area, you will not be able to edit in the topic area. It is a privilege that can be taken away. Behavior that ensures that you retain that privilege is entirely in your hands, not mine. Sean.hoyland - talk 14:50, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Sean.hoyland I found and added another source. Csi.southpark (talk) 15:09, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both of these sources are clearly blogs, and I have also reverted your edit. I have also reverted your unsourced assertion; you may not add a contentious claim with a "citation needed" tag. If you have no source for this edit, then you simply cannot add it, however self-evident the statement may seem to you. The fact that others reject this establishes that this is a contested claim, which needs a source. RolandR (talk) 16:19, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any of these better RolandR, Sean.hoyland?

http://books.google.ca/books?id=focLrox-frUC&pg=PA434&dq=seal+of+solomon+in+islam&hl=en&sa=X&ei=CARkUr38BqeqyAHDg4CICg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=seal%20of%20solomon%20in%20islam&f=false http://books.google.ca/books?id=KoiD_yafPT8C&pg=PA138&dq=seal+of+solomon+in+islam&hl=en&sa=X&ei=CARkUr38BqeqyAHDg4CICg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=seal%20of%20solomon%20in%20islam&f=false And here is a picture; not as a source just for fun: http://www.panoramio.com/photo/3422089 I also feel the need to clarify your other statement the citation needed tag was for someone else's claim under the photo that the Israeli flag is received with mixed feelings. Csi.southpark (talk) 16:41, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Csi.southpark reported by User:AsceticRose (Result: ). Thank you. AsceticRosé 17:46, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AsceticRose I removed something that I wrote. I did this because I realized the having the article say the Jewish people and Samaritans descend from Canaanites is, while true, going to cause problems so I simply removed it. And yes in the process I also removed what someone else added to my edit. But had I left my original comment in place with the other users edit. It would have caused more problems. So I'm sorry that I violated the 24 hour rule, but what would you have had me do. Csi.southpark (talk) 18:12, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 19:24, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an

WP:1RR at Jerusalem,

you have been blocked from editing for 24 hours. You are welcome to make useful contributions once the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and then appeal your block using the instructions there. Bbb23 (talk) 19:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

---

Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure prohibiting administrators

"from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page." Administrators who reverse an arbitration enforcement block, such as this one, without clear authorisation will be summarily desysopped.