User talk:Obiwana

Your recent rants at Talk:History of calculus replying to decade old posts where the issue has long been resolved are quite pointless. There is no need to attack other editors, especially after that length of time. Please assume good faith in future and stick to discussing the articles, not the editors, in future. SpinningSpark 17:12, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Obiwana And not only do they make you look bad, but if this sort of attack on Indians continues you may be banned from the topic area, please read the important notice above which you have apparently ignored. Doug Weller talk 19:43, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You did not identify the source of the material in your edit. It appears to be 2022 Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan. Copying within Wikipedia is acceptable but it must be attributed.

This type of edit does get picked up by Copy Patrol and a good edit summary helps to make sure we don't accidentally revert it. However, for future use, would you note the best practices wording as outlined at Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia? In particular, linking to the source article and adding the phrase "see that page's history for attribution" helps ensure that proper attribution is preserved.

While best practices are that attribution should be added to the edit summary at the time the edit is made, the linked article on best practices describes the appropriate steps to add attribution after the fact. I hope you will do so.--S Philbrick(Talk) 00:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that this guideline is not very well known, even among editors with tens of thousands of edits, so it isn't surprising that I point this out to some veteran editors, but there are some t's that need to be crossed.S Philbrick(Talk) 00:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sphilbrick I need to see if all or any of the sources mention war crimes. Doug Weller talk 09:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text into Pakistan war crimes from another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:56, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank red tailed hawk you can make an another article based on war crimes committed by Pakistan Obiwana (talk) 14:06, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That reply indicates to me that you have not understood the issue. You must not copy material in Wikipedia without making clear where it came from. Inviting the editor to create another article does not fix the problem. SpinningSpark 14:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pakistan war crimes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pakistan war crimes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Doug Weller talk 12:41, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hlo please explain me why we are deleting the article Obiwana (talk) 14:02, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's a terrible mess. Many references can't be checked because you copied and pasted the text without the details of the citations. Also sources need to mention war crimes, and those I checked don't. Doug Weller talk 14:05, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Obiwana. Thank you. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 14:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Obiwana (talk) 15:11, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not me it's some users who are using it Obiwana (talk) 15:17, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Obiwana. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators:

IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Girth Summit _(blether) 17:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you for the submission he was constantly attacking me and vandalising the Wiki page Obiwana (talk) 19:16, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alejandro Alagón Cano is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alejandro Alagón Cano until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Hello,man I am extremely sorry for what I have did during that time.I didn't knew anything at all about wikipedia sockpuppetry so I did it.I request you that next time I won't be involved in any sockpuppetry again and I will continue to edit in my account only Obiwana (talk) 16:47, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]