User talk:Antinthemiddie: Difference between revisions

Line 35: Line 35:

{{unblock|reason=I understand the reasons for the block in reference to [[WP:GS/KURD]], which involves highly contentious topics. My original intention was not to cause disruption, but to ensure these sources remain historically accurate, and in line with the articles’ past. I do not believe my edit requests to be controversial, rather unbiased, and well cited. I understand my demeanor came across as more debative than receptive, and I will be sure to take this into account in moving forward. My goal was not to dissociate, delineate, or be controversial, but to unify the culture, highlight what progress has been made, and ensure the article(s) represent how far culture has progressed. I agree with the formality, and will not further edit anything about Kurds and Kurdistan until I am considered extended-confirmed. Instead, I will stick to current events, and provide high-level, scholarly support, with the relevant resources. I will also contribute the those fields which I am considered an SME (as per reason to make an account), which include economics and a variety technologies. As for understanding, I understand, and will no longer be disruptive or cause any further disruptions. I understand these pages are for broadly construed topics, rather than highly contented and ambiguous histories. The types of edits requests that are preferred include constructive additions and those that are appropriate and relevant to the subject matter. }}

Whatever your goal might have been is actually not relevant; you are not yet permitted to contribute in that topic area at all, regardless of your reason for doing so. You need to clearly state that you understand that and will not further edit about Kurds and Kurdistan until you are extended-confirmed, and tell us what topics you might edit about instead. I don’t even think that you should be making edit requests until you show an understanding as to what types of edit requests are permitted. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 13:48, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

:@[[User:Rosguill|Rosguill]] @[[User:331dot|331dot]] Noting that the user has edited their unblock request since the last comment, would you be okay with a full topic ban on Kurds and Kurdistan, ”broadly construed” (including no edit requests) until ECR as an unblock condition?{{pb}}@[[User:Antinthemiddie|Antinthemiddie]], for that matter, “broadly construed” does not respect to the scope of the article (as you seem to write in your addition), but means that subjects adjacent to the topic are understood to fall under that limitation. It means that, for instance, you will not be able to edit about a city with Kurdish history, or about a political party or organization with ties to Kurdish nationalism. [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style=”color:#8a7500″>Chaotic <span style=”color:#9e5cb1″>Enby</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 19:29, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello Antinthemiddie. Please see WP:GS/KURD. —HistoryofIran (talk) 20:30, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello HistoryofIran. The only mention of Iran is within the rebellions. This is my point. The only mention of Kurds in reference to Iran is geographically and linguistically. Again back to where Kurdish is the official language, but not ethnically recognized. These are factual, not something a group of people can change within their pretentious agreements. Antinthemiddie (talk) 21:02, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read WP:GS/KURD? Here’s what it says;

A community discussion at the administrators’ noticeboard has placed all pages with content related to Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly interpreted, under the extended confirmed restriction, effective 03:50, 3 January 2023 (UTC).

Extended confirmed restriction: only extended-confirmed editors may make edits related to the topic area, subject to the following provisions:

The restriction applies to all edits and pages related to the topic area, broadly construed, with the following exceptions:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the “Talk:” namespace to post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive. Should disruption occur on “Talk:” pages, administrators may take enforcement actions described in “B” or “C” below. However, non-extended-confirmed editors may not make edits to internal project discussions related to the topic area, even within the “Talk:” namespace. Internal project discussions include, but are not limited to, AfDs, WikiProjects, RfCs, RMs, and noticeboard discussions.

Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required. HistoryofIran (talk) 21:44, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have only asked to reflect the true sociocultural values of this ethnic group. Antinthemiddie (talk) 21:55, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What I’m trying to tell you is that continuing what you’re doing is a violation of WP:GS/KURD. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:00, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This also goes for you. Nothing I’ve said is disruptive. Misrepresenting facts is a direct violation of WP:GS/KURD, and hiding behind it, is the very thing it seeks to protect. If you do not want to publish the facts, what you are saying is simply hypocrisy. Antinthemiddie (talk) 22:05, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, it does not go for me, and it shows you haven’t read the policy. “Facts” is what WP:RS says, which you’re disregarding, attempting to debate other users as an alternative (WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS). Last warning. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:57, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This talk history will look great upon arbitration. Antinthemiddie (talk) 23:08, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeat violations of the GS/KURD WP:ECR provision despite warnings, plus tendentious argumentation that indicates that you have no intent to follow Wikipedias policies and norms..

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).

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

Request reason:

I have only supplied additional facts for a discussion basis. As per bias concern, [1] highlights that I am not biased, only looking to highlight the denotative reasoning (e.g. Kurdish being Iraqs Official Language). Also please note that I am not being argumentative, rather trying to resolve with best way forward, without offending or affecting any sociocultural norms. Antinthemiddie (talk) 00:04, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

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.

In addition to re-reading GS/KURD, I would strongly recommend reviewing WP:EXPLAINECR and WP:RGW before filing an appeal. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:54, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Request reason:

Please explain explicitly what exactly was considered disruptive, and how correcting the supplied sources is not a “constructive comment” for “edit requests related to articles within the topic area”?

Decline reason:

not constructive, not constructive, not constructive. – The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:43, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Request reason:

Drawing the relationship between language, culture, and ethics is not constructive to this discussion? Calling it a good step, is the denotative definition of constructive. Each of the articles required cite verification. When I looked to verify them, the cite was either no accessible, and/or incorrect and non-existent upon further investigation. This is also non-constructive to the discussion of getting Kurdish ethnic history correct? See History of the Kurds.

Decline reason:

Antinthemiddie, if you’d read and understood WP:ECREXPLAIN like I suggested when you were first blocked, you would understand the issue at hand and the appropriate way to regain Wikipedia’s trust and with it, editing privileges. Attempting to continue discussions of sources and content in a topic that you are unambiguously prohibited from participating in at this time is a total nonstarter. What you need to demonstrate at this time is that you understand the relevant community norms that you violated and how to avoid doing that again going forward. Continuing to discuss sources and content relating to Kurdish national identity manifestly demonstrates that you do not yet understand the issue, and if you continue down this road it’s going to end with losing your access to appeal your block on this page for wasting the community’s time. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 13:30, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Request reason:

I would be happy to go through the first three cites listed (copy-pasted) on each article including Kurds, Kurdish tribes, and History of the Kurds. First, John A. Shoup’s Ethnic Groups of Africa and the Middle East; Nowhere within this work are Kurds, or any reference to Kurds, Kurdish Tribes, or their Historic Culture mentioned. Second, in Who are the Kurds by Kendal Nezan, the only mention of Ethnicity or Culture is in reference to their own Kurdish identity. I believe this reference misrepresented the message given by the Author. The only mentions of Iran is in reference to geography, and battles, as I’ve mentioned within other talks. Finally Third, Encyclopedia of Islam, Second Edition; Nowhere in this work does it read “The Kurds, an Iranian people of the Near East, live at the junction of (…)” as cited within each article. Therefore I believe these articles are academically dishonest, and misrepresent the citations to promote a biased form of journalism. I think this tows the line of false journalism, and that gatekeeping these facts is an utter, and complete, travesty. Especially without further constructive discussion and debate.

Decline reason:

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

Request reason:

I’m reading WP:ECREXPLAIN in reference to the specificity, and controversiality, right? My original thought was calling the culture heterogeneous made the article less controversial, as a whole, and provided the citations as support. I think as it stands, seems highly controversial (as the topic(s) stand(s) today as highly contentious), especially with faulty citation. Please advise here.

Decline reason:

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

I understand the reasons for the block in reference to WP:GS/KURD, which involves highly contentious topics. My original intention was not to cause disruption, but to ensure these sources remain historically accurate, and in line with the articles’ past. I do not believe my edit requests to be controversial, rather unbiased, and well cited. I understand my demeanor came across as more debative than receptive, and I will be sure to take this into account in moving forward. My goal was not to dissociate, delineate, or be controversial, but to unify the culture, highlight what progress has been made, and ensure the article(s) represent how far culture has progressed. I agree with the formality, and will not further edit anything about Kurds and Kurdistan until I am considered extended-confirmed. Instead, I will stick to current events, and provide high-level, scholarly support, with the relevant resources. I will also contribute the those fields which I am considered an SME (as per reason to make an account), which include economics and a variety technologies. As for understanding, I understand, and will no longer be disruptive or cause any further disruptions. I understand these pages are for broadly construed topics, rather than highly contented and ambiguous histories. The types of edits requests that are preferred include constructive additions and those that are appropriate and relevant to the subject matter.

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing “blocking administrator” with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I understand the reasons for the block in reference to [[WP:GS/KURD]], which involves highly contentious topics. My original intention was not to cause disruption, but to ensure these sources remain historically accurate, and in line with the articles' past. I do not believe my edit requests to be controversial, rather unbiased, and well cited. I understand my demeanor came across as more debative than receptive, and I will be sure to take this into account in moving forward. My goal was not to dissociate, delineate, or be controversial, but to unify the culture, highlight what progress has been made, and ensure the article(s) represent how far culture has progressed. I agree with the formality, and will not further edit anything about Kurds and Kurdistan until I am considered extended-confirmed. Instead, I will stick to current events, and provide high-level, scholarly support, with the relevant resources. I will also contribute the those fields which I am considered an SME (as per reason to make an account), which include economics and a variety technologies. As for understanding, I understand, and will no longer be disruptive or cause any further disruptions. I understand these pages are for broadly construed topics, rather than highly contented and ambiguous histories. The types of edits requests that are preferred include constructive additions and those that are appropriate and relevant to the subject matter. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I understand the reasons for the block in reference to [[WP:GS/KURD]], which involves highly contentious topics. My original intention was not to cause disruption, but to ensure these sources remain historically accurate, and in line with the articles' past. I do not believe my edit requests to be controversial, rather unbiased, and well cited. I understand my demeanor came across as more debative than receptive, and I will be sure to take this into account in moving forward. My goal was not to dissociate, delineate, or be controversial, but to unify the culture, highlight what progress has been made, and ensure the article(s) represent how far culture has progressed. I agree with the formality, and will not further edit anything about Kurds and Kurdistan until I am considered extended-confirmed. Instead, I will stick to current events, and provide high-level, scholarly support, with the relevant resources. I will also contribute the those fields which I am considered an SME (as per reason to make an account), which include economics and a variety technologies. As for understanding, I understand, and will no longer be disruptive or cause any further disruptions. I understand these pages are for broadly construed topics, rather than highly contented and ambiguous histories. The types of edits requests that are preferred include constructive additions and those that are appropriate and relevant to the subject matter. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I understand the reasons for the block in reference to [[WP:GS/KURD]], which involves highly contentious topics. My original intention was not to cause disruption, but to ensure these sources remain historically accurate, and in line with the articles' past. I do not believe my edit requests to be controversial, rather unbiased, and well cited. I understand my demeanor came across as more debative than receptive, and I will be sure to take this into account in moving forward. My goal was not to dissociate, delineate, or be controversial, but to unify the culture, highlight what progress has been made, and ensure the article(s) represent how far culture has progressed. I agree with the formality, and will not further edit anything about Kurds and Kurdistan until I am considered extended-confirmed. Instead, I will stick to current events, and provide high-level, scholarly support, with the relevant resources. I will also contribute the those fields which I am considered an SME (as per reason to make an account), which include economics and a variety technologies. As for understanding, I understand, and will no longer be disruptive or cause any further disruptions. I understand these pages are for broadly construed topics, rather than highly contented and ambiguous histories. The types of edits requests that are preferred include constructive additions and those that are appropriate and relevant to the subject matter. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

@Rosguill @331dot Noting that the user has edited their unblock request since the last comment, would you be okay with a full topic ban on Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed (including no edit requests) until ECR as an unblock condition?@Antinthemiddie, for that matter, “broadly construed” does not respect to the scope of the article (as you seem to write in your addition), but means that subjects adjacent to the topic are understood to fall under that limitation. It means that, for instance, you will not be able to edit about a city with Kurdish history, or about a political party or organization with ties to Kurdish nationalism. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:29, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply