User talk:Sys64wiki

Hi there. Questions about the operation of the Teahouse, such as this one, are best asked at Wikipedia talk:Teahouse. Asking those sorts of questions in amongst answers on the main Teahouse page is just likely to confuse editors whose question the section is about. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:36, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IPs and non-extended confirmed users are not permitted to make edits to any page on Wikipedia related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. This includes you, as you don't yet have 500 edits. Please see below. 331dot (talk) 15:39, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I can see but this is more quite confusing since I have not edited any. Sys64wiki (talk) 00:22, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged in, have 500 edits, and have an account age of 30 days, and you are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any page within this topic.

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 arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

331dot (talk) 15:40, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know if this error or not but I keep myself away from politics, such as country or islamic conflicts, so As far as I can see I did not have "edited" any part of I/A conflicts, but recently I have commented on the subject ig. Thanks for understanding. Sys64wiki (talk) 00:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sys64wiki, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles § Definition of the "area of conflict" – the restriction applies to all pages on this topic, including discussions (not only articles). ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email · global) 03:50, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably better to continue this conversation here instead of on the blocked user's page (courtesy ping 331dot). I didn't mean to suggest that you were proxying, but that blocked user is someone who is known to try to get other users to make edits for them. I only meant to make you aware, in case they tried that with you. I disabled that account's email and their ability to post on their talk page, but they also already made another new sockpuppet since that account was blocked less than an hour ago. They're very persistent. I do appreciate you're trying to help new users. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 12:06, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I did see and I think the guy is bombarding article unnecessarily, we should check his other active accounts too, throughly, in case we missed it. Well yes I did not see the big picture of this mister and that made me quite a guy defending vandalist, haha, however I accept my part of mistake. Sys64 message this user 12:10, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would add that it is often(though not always) a sign of sock puppetry that a supposedly brand new user is interested in something like the operation of a bot- something requiring at least some preexisting knowledge of Wikipedia that new users typically do not have. 331dot (talk) 13:57, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Help desk. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Insulting the editor is not helping the cause. Drmies (talk) 00:44, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sys64wiki, please be accurate with your answers at the Teahouse. Per WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY, writing about oneself is not prohibited although it is strongly discouraged. If you are not reasonably sure that your answer is correct, please let someone else answer the question. Cullen328 (talk) 00:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to remove it if you would like, maybe I have made mistake in my wording. But dont let an inexperienced editor make a claim like this, Please don't respond to new editors at the Teahouse if your only contributions here are to mock them for not being able to write an article properly. Just knock it off already, since mocking anybody is not my virtue nor I beleive it would help anybody. Thank you. Sys64 message this user 01:11, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sys64wiki,

I would strongly advise you to read Law of holes.

No, "law of holes" this isn't one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines or an essay.

It's a "mainspace" article that has existed since March 2012.

Have you read it? What do you think about it?

Peter in Australia aka Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 09:26, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its a very nonsense article in my opinion and makes no sense to me, if it does in your case feel free to chant its meaning. Sys64 message this user 12:46, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More importantly do we know each other? Sys64 message this user 13:19, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]