User talk:Baytbeharim

Introduction to contentious topics

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 an account age of 30 days, and 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.

Note the 30/500 restriction in particular. Zero^talk 00:13, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 2025

Hello, I'm Dr vulpes. I noticed that you recently removed content from Herrenvolk democracy 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. Dr vulpes (Talk) 08:35, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, no flag icons in Infobox per MOS:INFOBOXFLAG. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:48, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is suitable in infoboxes

Hello, I'm User:Worldbruce. I undid your recent contributions to the page Indo-Pakistani war of 1971 because you changed information inside an infobox in a way contrary to the instructions for the infobox. The infobox is meant to summarize the key facts already present in the article.

A 2023 RfC concluded that "supported by" sections are generally inappropriate in military conflict infoboxes. The information is usually too nuanced to be condensed into what are high level summaries. Any exceptions require prior consensus.
Also, recent talk page discussions have observed that there are already too many "commanders" listed in the infobox. It is not intended as a place for the names of all commanders, only a select few of those already mentioned in the body of the article.

If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. -- Worldbruce (talk) 01:03, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]