User talk:Guru Noel

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Welcome!

Hello, Guru Noel, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as May 2013 Syrian chemical weapon attack, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! PBASH607 (The One Day Apocalypse) (talk) 01:09, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of May 2013 Syrian chemical weapon attack

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as May 2013 Syrian chemical weapon attack, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The page has been nominated for deletion, in accordance with Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. PBASH607 (The One Day Apocalypse) (talk) 01:09, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guru Noel, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Guru Noel! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Doctree (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of China stock market crash

The article China stock market crash has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTNEWS - stock indexes rise and fall all the time, mostly without long-term consequences.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Zanhe (talk) 23:04, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Chinese black monday for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chinese black monday 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/Chinese black monday until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. TheLongTone (talk) 12:54, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fatimid desecration of Jerusalem, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Constantine and Church. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:17, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Fatimid desecration of Jerusalem

Hello! Your submission of Fatimid desecration of Jerusalem at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:00, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

National Initiative for Administration and Change in Syria

added links pointing to Liberal and Minister

Fatimid desecration of Jerusalem

added a link pointing to Patriarch of Jerusalem

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Talk:Russian-Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah offensive for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Talk:Russian-Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah offensive 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/Talk:Russian-Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah offensive until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Legacypac (talk) 07:23, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Russian-Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah offensive for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Russian-Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah offensive 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/Russian-Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah offensive until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Legacypac (talk) 07:28, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Four committees initiative

added links pointing to Peace process and Envoy

Syrian Civil War

added a link pointing to Peace process

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Latakia offensive (October 2015)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Latakia offensive (October 2015), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Quneitra offensive (October 2015). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 09:40, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate articles

Greetings, I see you wrote both Quneitra offensive (October 2015) and Latakia offensive (October 2015) with identical content. One should probably be rewritten or redirected.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:29, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, not really as Latakia and Quneitra are different places, hundreds of miles apart. There is some non-identical content. Guru Noel (talk) 10:47, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The only non-identical content is one sentence in one row and the titles of the articles. Everything else is a carbon copy. Both articles have now been redirected. Quneitra (which was a rebel, not government operation) to an already existing article on the Quneitra events that has existed for weeks. Latakia to the Northwestern Syria offensive article since the Latakia events are covered there as they fall under the one unified offensive to secure the Alawite heartland (by capturing the Sahel al-Ghab plains, northern Hama and Jabal al-Akrad mountains). EkoGraf (talk) 20:14, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Russia-Syria-Iran-Iraq-Jordan Coalition for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Russia-Syria-Iran-Iraq-Jordan Coalition 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/Russia-Syria-Iran-Iraq-Jordan Coalition until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Mhhossein (talk) 05:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Damascus countryside offensive (October 2015)

added a link pointing to Erbin

Qatari involvement in the Syrian Civil War

added a link pointing to Lebanese

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Damascus countryside offensive (October 2015) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Damascus countryside offensive (October 2015) 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/Damascus countryside offensive (October 2015) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Mdann52 (talk) 09:29, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Homs offensive (October 2015) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Homs offensive (October 2015) 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/Homs offensive (October 2015) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Mdann52 (talk) 09:31, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Daraa offensive (October 2015)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

1RR violation on an article related to the Syrian civil war. The full report is at WP:AN3#User talk:Guru Noel reported by User:EkoGraf (Result: Blocked). Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 02:21, 30 October 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

Illegitmate blanking or redirecting a page is WP:Vandalism, repairing that is not 1RR

Decline reason:

If you've linked to the definition of vandalism, you must have read it. Therefore, you should understand what vandalism is and what it's not. Especially since this wasn't even a content dispute - just an administrator closing an AfD. If you disagree with their decision, welocme to WP:DRV, however edit warring will never get you anywhere, as evident from this block. Max Semenik (talk) 05:09, 30 October 2015 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

WP:DRV is not necessary as Daraa offensive (October 2015) is a legitimate page that cannot be deleted, without due discussion. The actions I have been blocked for were in defense of those principles from those vandalising and trying to illegitimately blank it. I didn't actually notice at the time that one of the three reverts was an administrator to be fair. I also didn't notice that admin was involved in the deletion discussion for a different article. I thought it was all the same vandal, who twice blanked the page claiming the deletion discussion actioned it, when the discussion suggested nothing of the sort - the exact opposite actually - that the offensive be restructured - a suggestion by another editor that I acknowledged! The fact that it was an administrator backing up vandalistic actions is probably due for investigation elsewhere, but doesn't affect this undue block. Guru Noel (talk) 15:35, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This request just makes it more clear that you don't understand how Wikipedia works. As you've already been given numerous relevant policy links in prior unblock requests, the only one left to leave is WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:43, 30 October 2015 (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.

Disambiguation link notification for November 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Syrian Civil War peace process

added links pointing to Peace process and Envoy

Damascus countryside offensive (October 2015)

added a link pointing to Douma

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:24, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Coming straight off a block to continue the edit war is never going to end well for you... Mdann52 (talk) 10:28, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your constructive advice. I have started a discussion on the talk page as suggested. Guru Noel (talk) 13:10, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Daraa offensive (October 2015) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daraa offensive (October 2015) 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/Daraa offensive (October 2015) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Mdann52 (talk) 16:18, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Daraa offensive (October 2015), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Atman and FARS. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:13, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daraa offensive (October 2015), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Mdann52 (talk) 20:54, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Fatimid desecration of Jerusalem

Hello! Your submission of Fatimid desecration of Jerusalem at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:33, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Guru Noel. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse of multiple accounts

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:50, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=Hi, I live in a student house. There are a few of us here who edit. I am not socking.}}