Battle of Backbone Mountain

Hi Rembo01! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! JarrahTree 04:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some editors take https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Icons#Flags issues about flag usage seriously... JarrahTree 04:36, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

removing references and editing in general require in english - explanations in the WP:edit summary - thank you JarrahTree 04:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Ckfasdf (talk) 12:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Indonesian National Revolution. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. And yes, we do know that you have been doing this edit as an IP editor before you created this account. 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.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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 and 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. -- Toddy1 (talk) 16:59, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. -- Toddy1 (talk) 17:19, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Toddy1. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Papua conflict seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- Toddy1 (talk) 23:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Insurgency in Aceh. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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 and 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. -- Toddy1 (talk) 23:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to the article on the Indonesian invasion of East Timor has been reverted. There were several problems with it.

1. You got the formatting wrong, so your edit messed up the infobox. We all make mistakes! What I do is to use the "print preview" button, and also to look at the page after I have edited it to check that it is ok. Both of these catch mistakes that I have made. maybe they would work for you too?
2. The image that was in the infobox, was a map showing the areas under Indonesian control in October 1976 (the invasion was in December 1975). That seems a lot more useful than a photograph of Indonesian soldiers holding a captured flag.
3. The image you wanted to put into the infobox is already there in the article. We do not need it to be displayed twice on the same page.

-- Toddy1 (talk) 23:44, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look at Talk:Papua conflict#Casualties update needed a citation. I have tried to explain what you need to do to provide a citation. I cannot do it for you because I do not know the source. If you find it difficult, use User:Rembo01/sandbox to experiment until you get it right. You can ask for help by posting a message on the article talk page.-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! -- Toddy1 (talk) 07:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Trlovejoy. I noticed that in this edit to Operation Cartenz's Peace, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. TRL (talk) 05:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Operasi militer di Aceh Screen-Shot-5884.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Indonesian soldiers hunt down members of the separatist Free Aceh Movement (GAM) in a village in Lhok Seumawe, Aceh, on 21 May 2003.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you know that wikilinks are case sensitive. So Insurgency in Aceh works, but Insurgency in aceh does not. But there is an exception - if the first character of a wikilink is lower case, it still works: insurgency in Aceh.

If you do a wikilink to the page title of the page the wikilink on, it merely bolds the text (e.g. User talk:Rembo01). Though the wikilink does work, if you link to a section heading on the page (e.g. User talk:Rembo01#Welcome!).-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:48, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Toddy1. The images you keep uploading on Commons appears to be copyrighted content that you found on other websites. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Pretending that you are copyright holder is not helpful. -- Toddy1 (talk) 16:10, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Abdullah Syafei'i, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Operation Gunung Gede, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KSAL. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 18:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rembo01. Thank you for your work on Battalion 426 rebellion. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 09:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Revolutionary Government of the Republic of Indonesia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PRRI.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Supported by" is conflict infoboxes is deprected, see request for comment at Template talk:Infobox military conflict#RfC on "supported by" being used with the belligerent parameter. Per that, positive consensus is needed for any exceptions to it, see also guidance at WP:ONUS. If you feel those should be included, you will need to start a discussion at Talk:Papua conflict. Kathleen's bike (talk) 00:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should you restore "Supported by" to the infobox again, or at Indonesian National Revolution or other articles, I will be filing a report at WP:AE. Kathleen's bike (talk) 15:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made to restore "supported by" to the infoboxes of the articles on Papua conflict and Indonesian National Revolution. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. 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 and 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. -- Toddy1 (talk) 06:47, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reverting Kathleen's bike's deletion of the "supported by" stuff in the infobox of Indonesian National Revolution. She has explained why she had deleted it above. If you think that the "supported by" stuff ought to be in the infobox, please could you explain why at Talk:Indonesian National Revolution#Supported by:.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. This is a standard message to inform you that discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Kathleen's bike (talk) 00:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Ckfasdf (talk) 03:19, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring and failure to communicate. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers since the block there have been IPs 36.71.137.211 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and 114.5.146.201 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) reverting to Rembo01's non-consensus version. Kathleen's bike (talk) 03:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also 114.5.147.200 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), missed due to similar IP. Kathleen's bike (talk) 03:13, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers {{unblock|reason=Hi Firefangledfeathers I really beg you to change the duration of my block to just one week, I promise to obey the rules that apply on this site. Rembo01 (talk) 13:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. If you'd like me to correct the formatting of your unblock request, I can, but I'd suggest that you not address it to me directly, since that was the mistake you made in your last unblock request. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers Then who should I convey to? Rembo01 (talk) 13:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock requests are reviewed by uninvolved administrators, and the blocking admin (me) steps aside, except to answer questions or give advice. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers How do I ask not to be blocked by the administrator, can you tell me how? Rembo01 (talk) 00:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks and then use Template:Unblock again. If you have specific questions after reading the guide, you should ask before requesting the unblock. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers

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).

Rembo01 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I really regret and feel guilty about the actions I have done so far because I am still a beginner at editing on this site, please forgive me Rembo01 (talk) 14:37, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You seem to be addressing Firefangledfeathers, but unblock requests are to ask for a third party to review the block. If you want to attempt to resolve this with them first, you don't need to make an unblock request. If you want someone else to review this, please make a request that specifically speaks to the reasons for the block. 331dot (talk) 14:44, 20 April 2024 (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.

I really regret and feel guilty about the actions I have done so far because I am still a beginner at editing on this site, please forgive me. Rembo01 (talk) 14:42, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you had reflected on your actions after one of the multiple warnings, or after one of the temporary blocks. I'm unconvinced that you understand what you did wrong and what you need to do differently in the future. I would not recommend or support an unblock request at this time. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:04, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I promise I will not repeat this mistake again and will follow the existing regulations. Rembo01 (talk) 04:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

as a watcher of Indonesian material, I cannot see how, after repeated warnings, and blocks, there is actually any actual recognition of what mistakes have occurred in the last few months. JarrahTree 06:17, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you read WP:GAB, it talks about the need for you to "understand what you are blocked for". Remember you have achieved four separate blocks, all for different reasons:

• 17:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• 14:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC) on Commons[reply]
• 12:42, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• 03:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

-- Toddy1 (talk) 06:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JarrahTree OK, thanks for the input, friend. I really don't know and regret it even though I only edited according to history and existing facts. Rembo01 (talk) 09:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have a real problem in that you are not addressing the issues raised by people who have come to this page to explain: -

In english, guilt, regret, mistakes, asking forgiveness, are not what is being asked here, you seem to be missing the point.

Each block, and issue needs to be spoken to - that is in your own words, you are being asked to explain what you think you were being checked for.

Generic/general terms that explicate your response to the blocks but do not help other readers to understand whether you have any sense of what you are being checked about.

Kalau mau lebih jelas dalam bahasa Indonesia, jangan ragu untuk menanyakan pertanyaan jika tidak mengerti, tetapi bahasa saya sudah rusak, I prefer english...

If you keep asking for an unblock by saying sorry or please forgive you, that won't work. You need to explain your mistakes and what they were. JarrahTree 13:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]