Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 30 days are automatically archived by ClueBot III if there are more than 2.

This user participates in WikiProject Palestine.

This user participates in WikiProject Islam.

This user is a member of WikiProject Human rights

Whaling in the Faroe Islands (DYK) Al-Wishah fi Fawa'id al-Nikah (DYK) Birzeit Brewery Bisan Center for Research and Development Genghis Khan Ghadir Khumm Mohammad El Halabi Beer in Palestine Burial place of Genghis Khan Concubinage (law) Ermenek Grand Mosque Iplikçi Mosque (DYK) Maizbhandari (DYK) Mattanza Ongoing Nakba (DYK) Tahsin Yazıcı (scholar) Tomb of Genghis Khan Wives of Genghis Khan Where Heaven and Earth Meet (DYK) Union of Palestinian Women's Committees Zdravka Matišić List of companies operating in West Bank settlements List of Middle Eastern dishes List of Turkish Grand Mosques

You have no enemies, you say? Alas, my friend, the boast is poor. He who has mingled in the fray of duty that the brave endure, must have made foes. If you have none, small is the work that you have done. You’ve hit no traitor on the hip. You’ve dashed no cup from perjured lip. You’ve never turned the wrong to right. You’ve been a coward in the fight. ~ CM

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for violating your topic ban after a warning on the page Hellenistic Palestine, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 2 weeks. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. 

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:53, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes"). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

I don' consider any appeals via email unless there is a privacy or similar concern. Please keep any discussion here. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:54, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well I won't waste your time with a reprint – perhaps you can clarify what you are broadly construing to be the problem here, because these are subjective parameters, and I need to understand your thinking in order to adequately understand the problem. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:24, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the region, both current and historical, is a point of contention in the Arab/Israel conflict, so it definitely falls under WP:ARBPIA. The reason you didn't get a further warning is that you were already given a logged warning for an earlier violation. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:38, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the Talk:Hellenistic_Palestine#Duplicative_article section starting by sockmaster Tombah includes 2 non-EC accounts participating in a consensus forming discussion. I added the ArbCom Arab-Israeli enforcement template. Sean.hoyland (talk) 10:08, 27 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I may have to ask you for some further clarity on that down the line, but for the meantime, would you be open to considering modifying the block to something less wholly restrictive? 99% of my current activities generate zero heat, but it is the 99% that I am now being restricted from working on. Most pertinently, there are several unrelated ongoing discussions that I have input on but am currently unable to participate in – so I wonder if a modification to a mainspace-only block is a thing that exists and could work? Any other alternative would also be welcome. I am appealing to your clemency here – perhaps in recognition that my wandering into the grey twice in nine months isn't really much an indication of malicious intent for the project. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:33, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ScottishFinnishRadish what do you think about the "twice in nine months" claim and request for clemency? Jay 💬 10:03, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There have been at least four violations with one coming after a logged warning. I am unconvinced that lifting or modifying the block is the right call.

Sean.hoyland, that section hasn't been edited in a year so there's really not much to be done now. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:56, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SFR: You can draw what conclusions you like, but I obviously have no motive to violate the TBAN, and earlier this year, when I was invited by Doug Weller to edit something that I considered risky and I'm sure you would consider covered, I firmly declined. In today's episode, I was quite clear in the thread that brought you here that I did not believe the material was covered, due to the extremely archaic nature of the topic. You clearly have a different interpretation of the scope of the CTOP insomuch as it pertains to names, even in the absence of a template. There is still much that I need to clarify on this, per WP:BANEX, because the answers I have so far do not make it clear. I will prepare questions. Also, do you agree with Sean's templating of the whole page, and if so, why, or should it be for only part of the page? Iskandar323 (talk) 16:43, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldnt it be prudent to just avoid anything remotely related to the topic rather than test the line? ← Metallurgist (talk) 05:03, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Metallurgist: How about you mind your own business? But yes, I do need clarity from @SFR as to what he thinks is or is not covered in Roman Palestine, and, most specifically, whether I can respond to the community time-wasting deletion request for that page. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:23, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to be rude. I am trying to help you avoid further sanctions. If I were in your position, I would just focus elsewhere to be safe. As for the AFD, I think it would be reasonable to permit your defense below or there, but I leave that to SFR. And its not personal, I found it awhile ago and just got around to proposing it. ← Metallurgist (talk) 06:32, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Metallurgist: If you nominate a page for deletion when it has numerous academic sources and further reading entries clearly referencing a term and rendering it notable, 9 times out of 10 that discussion is going to be a pointless timesink. Also, a content fork is where a pair of articles duplicate each other's scope. If a page is said to overlap with multiple other pages, that is not a fork, but something different, such as, say, an article about a period versus that of polities during that period. And if confusion over what constitutes a fork underpins a deletion discussion then there is in fact no rationale for deletion. In such instances, sensible editors with the best interests of the community in mind would generally be inclined to withdraw their nominations. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:05, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't (and won't in the immediate future) had time to review the article for everything that might fall under your topic ban, but if you're concerned about what led to your block you should steer clear of getting into disputes over the naming of the region as it relates to Israel, Palestine, Arabs, and Jews. For instance, don't remove Judea and add Palestine. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:33, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SFR So if it's solely a naming thing for you, however construed, then edits on dates etc. are OK then? Iskandar323 (talk) 08:38, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see an issue with that edit, but that doesn't apply to all edits on dates, broadly speaking. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:51, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Iskandar323, your recent request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests has been removed because it remained inactive for seventy-two hours after being contested. If you would like to proceed with your original request, please follow the directions at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial.

This notification was delivered by TenshiBot. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=TenshiBot}} on the top of your current page (your user talk page) TenshiBot (talk) 00:00, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a report involving you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement regarding a possible violation of an Arbitration Committee decision. The thread is Iskandar323. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlookyNapsta (talk • contribs) 14:01, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you followed the link and saw what is now titled § Iskandar323 (quick request), note that this notification is instead about the full thread at the bottom, § Iskandar323. There were duplicate section names on AE, as there was also a declined request in the new "quick enforcement" section (which may be used to request reverts or page restriction) during the two-week block. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 14:58, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Iskandar323, your recent request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests has been removed because it remained inactive for seventy-two hours after being contested. If you would like to proceed with your original request, please follow the directions at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial.

This notification was delivered by TenshiBot. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=TenshiBot}} on the top of your current page (your user talk page) TenshiBot (talk) 00:01, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Clarification request: Consensus of AfD concerning PIA topic article and ArbCom article enforcement and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, 11WB (talk) 18:38, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iljhgtn (talk) 18:48, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the above section. The Arbitration Committee is reviewing the allegations made at AE that you (and others) violated your topic ban. There is a section for you to reply if you wish. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:41, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. This is to explain why I reverted your move from Rig-e Jenn to Desert of Spirits. Given that you supported your request to move Dasht-e Lut based on Google Ngrams findings (which I verified), it seems paradoxical that you moved Rig-e Jenn despite Google Ngrams showing no books containing the destination name at all. In fact, when I exclude Discogs, Apple Music, and Facebook from the search to avoid matches on a piece of music by that title, Google Search turns up only 69 mentions of "Desert of Spirits" anywhere on the web. Further, even with those exclusions, most of those results are about the piece of music. Google Scholar returns no relevant matches for the name. Therefore, it seems unlikely (I'd really say impossible) that "Desert of Spirits" satisfies any applicable guideline for article naming. Largoplazo (talk) 17:10, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Largoplazo: The logic was that Rig-e Jenn is also sufficiently obscure that there are no Ngrams hits for that either. And since the translation is the official one of the Iran Tourism & Touring Organization, I thought that it might be preferable to the raw foreign language term. But it's quite tentative. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:39, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Google Ngrams does suggest the existence of matches.[1]. Looking directly at Google Books, their corpus includes books in English by four authors that refer to "Rig-e Jinn".[2] Largoplazo (talk) 19:25, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not so sure about the collection of fiction books, but I missed the Ngram trick about using parentheses to parse the hyphen — so well noted! Iskandar323 (talk) 19:35, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, yes, I've found the Ngrams Advanced Help well worth reading! Largoplazo (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You are a subject of multiple motions being considered by the Arbitration Committee. The motions are:

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Iskandar323 topic ban violations
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Iskandar323 further POV pushing
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Iskandar323 banned
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Iskandar323 topic banned
• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Iskandar323 warned

Your comments are welcome. If you need procedural assistance, you may contact the arbitration clerks either publicly or privately via email to clerks-llists.wikimedia.org. For the Arbitration Committee, GoldRomean (talk) 20:22, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is a draft page for an overwhelmingly large subject that I would like to invite you to help develop if you are interested. You are welcome to edit it anytime, or if you prefer, can wait until I move it into mainspace (but that might take a while, as I would like it to be good enough to be featured on DYK if possible). Tiamut (talk) 10:48, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Tiamut: Thanks for the invite. But it looks like I won't be able to support. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:30, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That is unfortunate because from what I have seen of your edits, there is much you could contribute there. Been away from here for a long time and see there are hundreds of articles in desperate need of revision and creation by people with knowledge of the region and sources. Seems many of them are being blocked from contributing though. Tiamut (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Tiamut: Mail me! Iskandar323 (talk) 09:39, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mailed you. Tiamut (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A clarification request in which you were named as a party has been closed and archived. No action is needed on your part. EggRoll97 ^(talk) 00:47, 9 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, sir, I hope you are doing well. I see your fantastic work on Maizbhandari Tariqa and would like to congrtulate you for the same. Do you mind reviewing Qadri Shattari against A class criteria and provide some suggestions to take it to FA later? ~2026-29985-9 (talk) 23:06, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In its presnt form it is rated as B class by a member of GOCE. Actually I am trying to take it to A class level. Thanks in anticipation. ~2026-29985-9 (talk) 23:08, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Iskandar323. Thank you for your work on Romano-Berber kingdoms. Another editor, Mariamnei, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your work on this article. Please establish notability as per WP:NGEO. Please also add more sources. Thanks and have a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mariamnei}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Mariamnei (talk) 12:29, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]