User talk:Salam.international

Adding your own commentary

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Rudaki, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:59, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and don't worry, my edits about Rudaki have been made according to international research from Iranian, Italian, Spanish sites and are completely correct.... I hope my edits will not be deleted, thank you Salam.international (talk) 10:04, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but that's not how it works here. You need to cite your info through WP:RS, which you did not. This is a WP:GA article, so expectations are high, both source, info and grammar/flow wise, none which were the case with your additions. Please read my edit summary [1]. HistoryofIran (talk) 11:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you have concerns, please use the talk page of the Rudaki article and reach WP:CONSENSUS. HistoryofIran (talk) 11:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And you're still doing the same, edit warring. Can you please stop? HistoryofIran (talk) 13:31, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Salam.international! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Rudaki several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Rudaki, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 10:59, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks. Salam.international (talk) 11:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Rudaki. 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:

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 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. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the edit l made were based on information research. You'd better increase your information. if my editds are wrong, let me know. Salam.international (talk) 13:40, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 months for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that 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 ~~~~}}. UtherSRG (talk) 13:41, 24 December 2024 (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).

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

Request reason:

Unfortunately everything went wrong, my editds were based on international information about (Rudaki) and were deleted... Edits that have been deleted should be restored as soon as possible. Salam.international (talk) 13:55, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not address your disruptive editing. 331dot (talk) 14:55, 24 December 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.

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2025-03-24T13:41:57Z for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Salam.international. 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. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that 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 ~~~~}}. UtherSRG (talk) 12:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]