User talk:Wali Omer

Welcome!

Hello, Wali Omer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Blurpeace 18:52, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright issue at Carl E. Taylor

Hi Wali, thank you for contributions. I noticed that the article you created, Carl E. Taylor, included some text that was directly copied from http://www.future.org/news/20100208/celebrating-life-carl-taylor. In order to keep Wikipedia a free resource, text that is copied from a source with an incompatible license must be removed. I have removed the majority of the text under the "Early life and education" and "International Health" sections, and replaced it with an original sentence. If you would like, you may rewrite the text in your own words. Thanks for your time, and if you have any questions feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Jujutacular ^T · C 20:00, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Dear Jujutacular,

Please note that this organization is owned by the last Carl Taylor and his son gave me the permission to do that. Please roll it back as it was.

Thanks for your comments. Wali

Wali, in order for that text to be used on Wikipedia, it must be released under a free license: see the Wikipedia article on Free content. It's not merely a matter of Wikipedia having permission to use the text: the text must be free for anyone to use. The website has a copyright notice at the bottom, with no indication that releases the text under a free license. If the copyright owners would like to do so, notification would need to be sent by email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Instructions for doing so are located at WP:CONSENT. Jujutacular ^T · C 22:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, although I already have his son's email about that to me but I prefer to re-write it again. Thanks again. I hope I will be able to do it after two weeks from now.

Problems with upload of File:18480 518373154530 64901199 30758549 4106453 n.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:18480 518373154530 64901199 30758549 4106453 n.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:05, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

Hello, I'm Cynko. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Visual release hallucinations— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Cynko (talk) 10:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Carl taylor.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Carl taylor.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 12:46, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some thoughts on editing Wikipedia

Hi Wali omer. Thanks for the message. I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Ronz (talk) 14:42, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Tim Seldin.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tim Seldin.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 16:45, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Tim Seldin.jpg

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on File:Tim Seldin.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.montessori.org/professional-development/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. reddogsix (talk) 17:30, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tim Seldin

The article Tim Seldin has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. reddogsix (talk) 17:31, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Tim Seldin, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. reddogsix (talk) 17:50, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of How To Raise An Amazing Child the Montessori Way

The article How To Raise An Amazing Child the Montessori Way has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable book. Fails WP:NOTBOOK.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. reddogsix (talk) 02:30, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Landmark report

The article Landmark report has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Judging from a bit of research, I can see that "landmark report" is often used when referring to previous publications, but it doesn't seem to have a fixed definition such that a list/disambig page could noncontroversially list examples. This also fails WP:DABRELATED.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. b uidhe 19:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

Your addition to Ibrahim Amin Baldar has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 16:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Intellectual clubs

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Intellectual clubs requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, society, or group that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Paisarepa (talk) 04:41, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Intellectual clubs for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Intellectual clubs 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/Intellectual clubs 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. power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:04, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Newton. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Intellectual societies moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Intellectual societies, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Gpkp [u • t • c] 07:27, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Intellectual societies (June 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Laplorfill was:

This could be an interesting topic for an article, but currently it only discusses Benjamin Franklin's clubs. In order to be published it would need to cover the much wider history of intellectual societies, summarized from reliable sources

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Intellectual societies and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Intellectual societies, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Laplorfill (talk) 16:49, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wali omer! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Laplorfill (talk) 16:49, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Al-Khalil ibn Ahmad al-Farahidi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kurdish.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Intellectual societies

Hello, Wali omer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Intellectual societies, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:03, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Intellectual societies (December 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Greenman was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

No improvement since the previous decline.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Intellectual societies and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Intellectual societies, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Greenman (talk) 13:20, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brush, Book, Bed moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Brush, Book, Bed, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DGG ( talk ) 18:31, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Brush, Book, Bed (February 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CNMall41 was:

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at American Academy of Pediatrics. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Would not be something outside of a few sentence stub which I do not see future expansion for. Would recommend including this as part of the AAP page.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Brush, Book, Bed and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Brush, Book, Bed, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CNMall41 (talk) 17:02, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Brush, Book, Bed

Hello, Wali omer. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Brush".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:25, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Intellectual societies (January 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Dan arndt were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This should be reformatted as 'List of Intellectual Societies' -the criteria for which would have to be carefully spelt out first.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Intellectual societies and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 02:54, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Intellectual societies

Hello, Wali Omer. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Intellectual societies".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:14, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Intellectual societies (October 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Intellectual societies and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 18:01, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From my experience with Wikipedia over the past two decades as a consumer as well as contributor, I have learned that you do not need to create a perfect article, you can start a stub and others will contribute by adding, deleting and correcting. I think this article is much more than a stub. Please correct me otherwise. Wali Omer (talk) 12:57, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Your edit to Education in Denmark has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. This is your third warning. — Diannaa (talk) 20:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I though I have added some valuable missing information. My understanding of Wikipedia is: it is a work in progress. That means, if we find any issues: missing information, factual or even copyright issues, someone will come along and either mark it or edit it (eg rephrasing). Please correct me otherwise. Wali Omer (talk) 12:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I normally wouldn't, but this is so severe and longstanding and anti-corrected that somebody must comment. Your fundamental understanding of Wikipedia appears to be wrong. You have been repeatedly warned for decades, with perfectly explicit explanations and consequences, that so much of what you've done is the opposite of valuable and often harmful. Especially to stop dumping copyrighted stuff for legal reasons, because you are legally endangering the whole project or otherwise wasting volunteer time. You were told you broke the law, and you implicated WMF in it. Your response is essentially that you think you're above the law or otherwise WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. Rejecting your corrections with "please correct me" does not mean you were not corrected, and is akin to WP:SEALION. That's in the rare case you ever responded to anything, in the decades of messages imploring you to stop dumping unencyclopedic material that must all be deleted and is a huge waste of time for you and all other volunteers. Stop forcing blatantly unencyclopedic draft articles, such as any stubs, even if you see that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. AfC is often wrong. In all cases, you've been definitively corrected and ignored all correction but reasserted your obliviousness. Was your latest dump also a copyright violation or is there something that compelled you to create that wall of obviously hopelessly unencyclopedic text?[1] Like that book says, don't let the small things get you down; but do let these huge earth-shattering bad things get you down and stop doing them. They're getting the rest of us down. WP:CIR. I trust you'll see the "thank"s that I applied to some examples of your many good edits. And again, do tell exactly where you got that last text dump. Thank you.

Regarding your other pillar policy violations of WP:OR most recently in May 2024, you can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. [2][3] violate WP:OR WP:SYNTH WP:OR WP:RS. Also please see WP:BAREURL to learn how to not add bare URLs, and use formatting or a tool like WP:REFILL. Thank you. — Smuckola (talk) 21:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Intellectual societies

Hello, Wali Omer. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Intellectual societies".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Graham87 (talk) 10:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit, where you added text sourced to a user-generated reference, is the final straw after a long line of warnings about disruptive editing. You are not suited to editing here. Graham87 (talk) 10:27, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wali Omer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

1. I think the block was not warranted. There was no enough reason or explanation. Can you please list the "long line of warnings about disruptive editing"? 2. I have been editing Wikipedia for many years with hundreds of accepted edits. 3. I need to make more necessary edits while I use Wikipedia, for example, while reading the article on Homeostasis, I wanted to add Goldilocks principle to the See also section but could not. Wali Omer (talk) 15:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you:
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 17:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

@Yamla:

The stated reason for my block is "Disruptive editing." Could you please clarify this, as the "blocker" did not provide any specific details?

If the primary issue is related to adding copyrighted material, I can ensure that I will avoid this in future contributions.

I am fully aware of the seriousness of plagiarism. However, my rationale for the previous edits was as follows:

1. I have observed numerous instances of copy-pasting on Wikipedia.

2. I assumed my contributions would be considered an initial draft (similar to a stub), and that other editors would later review, fix, and expand upon the content. Wali Omer (talk) 10:36, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't even attempt to address the example given above of one of your inappropriate edits, here. Nothing here convinces me you understand what was wrong with that edit, let alone the numerous other problems. No need to ping me, I won't be reviewing any future unblock request but you are free to make a new request, specifically addressing the problem with that edit and the numerous other problems. --Yamla (talk) 11:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Wali Omer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Can anyone please let me know why the above mentioned edit should result in blocking?

The edit only adds a sentence to clarify an ambiguous expression. Wali Omer (talk) 14:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If you observed someone robbing a bank, would you think that it was okay to rob a bank too? You are responsible for your own edits, and you need to make sure that they abide by policies, don't just copy what others do blindly. We are not responsible for your faulty assumptions; unless a page is under "pending changes" protection, all edits are public the moment you click "publish changes". This request does not address the many problems with your editing, so I am declining it. 331dot (talk) 18:01, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

We've repeatedly pointed you to WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, and WP:RS. Frankly, it looks like you can't be bothered to read our policies, even after we point out you are violating them. --Yamla (talk) 14:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]