Mavriksfan11

February 2013

Hello, I'm Josh3580. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Josh3580_talk/hist 05:36, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. Technopat (talk) 23:35, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Dead links

Hello. If you find links that have 404'd please leave them intact or attempt to recover using the Wayback Machine. Please see: Help:Using the Wayback Machine. (Even if a copy is not available in the Wayback Machine currently, they frequently resurface at later dates and are incorporated automagically by robots.) Thank you for your contributions. -- dsprc ^[talk] 21:48, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Icewhiz (talk) 07:30, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Council on American–Islamic Relations

Re [1] (I'm going to your talk - as it seems a more appropriate forum) - I suggest you let it play out in the talk section of the article for a few days. If no consensus emerges (in say - a week) - we could do a proper Request for Comments (not just labeling the talk section, actually running it as an RFC and soliciting comments via posts in the appropriate noticeboards, proper header, etc.). I suggest you leave the section in (as it has been in there for years prior to your removal in September) - until we reach consensus via talk or RFC if need be. Also, I suggest you read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (which I'm not sure applies to you, but I suspect some portions might - I think it might be relevant due to your editing areas, but I may be mistaken).Icewhiz (talk) 10:37, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

You are mistaken, and frankly it is insulting that you assume I am editing the pages of my organization or something like that. From what I read in Wikipedia:Conflict of interest it is when you edit pages of groups you have a relation to. That is quite insulting to suggest based on 0 evidence. Anyways, I am more in favor of getting a Third Opinion through W:3O. I would also like you to explain yourself in the Talk Page of the CAIR because you have made several erroneous claims without any evidence to back them up. 1) You claim the funding request is "well sourced and quite extraordinary" but you cannot produce multiple sources for it? No actual documents? No transcripts of House subcommittee meetings? "Well-sourced" does not mean "one source" and "quite extraordinary" is not proven by your lack of sources. This sends red flags for WP:V 2) You say "It is not for us to decide definitely that this is a "private project" and not part of CAIR." But you ignore the actual content of the source which makes it explicitly clear that this was a fundraising request for a private project by the leader of the group, not by the group itself, where it says "the congressman said the letter showed that Awad was in the process of setting up the Muslim Peace Foundation" and "CAIR executive director Nihad Awad asks Qaddafi for funding for his new project called the Muslim Peace Foundation." Lawmaker Criticizes Muslim Group Director's 2009 Fundraising Letter to Qaddafi. You need to take a step back and see what is actually being said in this article. Mavriksfan11 (talk) 15:48, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

I apologize if you were offended, however seeing that you were unaware of 3RR I thought it was appropriate to point out this bit of policy (while stating I wasn't sure this applies here at all) - if none of it applies, please disregard. Regarding CAIR - lets discuss it there. If you want to meta-discuss - I am frankly waiting for input from other editors on that talk page instead of going back and forth with you, repeating the same argeuments. If there isn't a large enough crowd, we could RFC.Icewhiz (talk) 15:57, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

I would rather do a W:3O because this is not that important. I am going to post it there. Mavriksfan11 (talk) 15:59, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

WP:PERSONAL and WP:ASPERSIONS

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Council on American–Islamic Relations. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Specifically this diff: [2].Icewhiz (talk) 07:03, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mavriksfan11. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mavriksfan11. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)