User talk:Pburkart
First Talk Post
Hello! Based on my understanding more experience Wikipedians should be alerted to this post, correct?
Either way, the
Your thread has been archived
|
Hi Pburkart! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please .
|
Nomination of 2023 Mykolaiv attacks for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Mykolaiv attacks 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.
Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 22:13, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the
Carter00000 (talk) 16:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Carter00000 (talk) 16:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans. This is a standard message to inform you that Eastern Europe or the Balkans is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.
You are currently prohibited from editing about the following topics:
- The Russo-Ukrainian war (WP:GS/RUSUKR);
This is because you are not
November 2023
Hello, I'm SkylarEstrada. I noticed that you recently removed content from Portal:Current events/2023 November 8 without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. SkylarEstrada (talk) 16:29, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
January 2024
Hello, I'm Ternera. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Abu Hafs al-Hashimi al-Qurashi, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ternera (talk) 17:36, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
- He is the leader of the terrorist organization IS. This doesn't need a source other than that Pburkart (talk) 17:39, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
IS leaders
Seeing your recent changes, I just wanted to explain why the word "militant" is generally used to describe the IS leaders instead of "terrorist":
- 1) Generally speaking, all IS leaders have been much more notable in fields aside of terrorism. They mainly command a global insurgency instead of individual attacks; they are the heads of a quasi-state (IS probably still rules more than 3 million people in Africa, BTW). "Militant" covers these broad activities better than "terrorist"; "terrorist" makes it look like they are mostly involved in small-scale terror operations instead of overseeing a network that currently controls a large territory in Mali and Nigeria and fields tens of thousands of fighters.
- 2) "Terrorist" is an extremely POV-heavy term. You may ask, "Why is this a problem for people like Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi who have planned terrorist attacks?" Well, because it is actually unclear why the person is labelled as a terrorist. Is it due to their actual methods or due to being sanctioned by state governments? Or is it just a negative label, used by someone without any deeper reason? In the lede, this remains unclear. Usually, it is better to describe the IS leaders as terrorists within a certain context, for example, "X planned/organized Z terrorist attacks in Y" or "X was declared a terrorist by Y government". These problems do not exist for the term "miltant".
- 3) We don't actually know to what extent the different IS leaders have been active as terrorists. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurashi definitely organized terrorist acttacks, and Abu al-Hasan al-Hashimi al-Qurashi probably did. However, we do not know enough about Abu al-Hussein al-Husseini al-Qurashi and Abu Hafs al-Hashimi al-Qurashi to firmly establish their terrorist activity. Thus, we cannot label all equally as terrorists.