User talk:Alasss123

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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 should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Welcome!

Hello, Alasss123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! — kashmiri ^TALK 16:37, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war

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. Materialscientist (talk) 12:56, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fethullah Gülen, Gulen Movement and Gulen Movement Schools pages editing war

Alasss123, Welcome to Wikipedia! You can make any changes in Wikipedia per "be bold" guidelines. However, remember that being bold is not an excuse to, even temporarily, violate the policy on material about living persons.

Your edit in Fethullah Gülen, Gulen Movement and Gulen Movement Schools, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan pages were reverted. Please do not revert to the biased version back and back again. If you believe that your edit comply to Wikipedia standards then use talk pages of respected articles to discuss your edits. Thank you.--Yakamoz51 (talk) 11:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

________

I'd just like to state that I'm reverting back to the original version before you made the changes, as I strongly believe your edit is bias because a lot of it is about the Turkish government and trying to undermine the allegations the group is currently facing. These pages are about Fethullah Gulen, the Gulen Movement and Gulen Movement Schools, and therefore the content should be closely linked to them.

You have also removed multiple times the statement of Turkish officials referring to the Gulen movement as a terrorist group. This statement is not being bias, as this is actually what the Turkish officials refer to the movement as. The public has the right to know about the different names of the group.

The closures of the Gulen schools have and are occurring, and are not something that should be removed. The sources are sufficient to prove this. Removing it is actually being bias because you are trying to hide certain aspects regarding the schools. I would like to emphasize that being bias is not just about writing in a one-sided manner, but also omitting certain information. You have no solid claims to remove this.

You also removed other information I added, showing another side to the storey, such as claims of Zaman being the most circulated newspaper in Turkey as being fabricated. The sources explaining this are reliable, and indeed such extra information provides a two sided argument ensuring there is no bias. You removing this is what really creates a bias nature.

I would also like to highlight that many others have reverted your changes, and many others have made edits to these pages without removing the content which I have put, but you have removed. I have even been thanked for my edits. All this points towards me not being bias.

If you would like to raise bias issues, please do so in talk pages of the relevant pages.

Thanks, Alasss123 (talk) 13:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

________

To start discuss the subjects, I will follow Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle to reach a consensus. ( What you have done was "BOLD", What I am doing is "REVERT", and What we should do is "DISCUSS"). If you don't have an agenda of disruptive editing, and do not want to disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate your points please wait for third opinion. Otherwise, there is no point to DISCUSS that would cause to an infinite loop. Thank you. Yakamoz51 (talk) 06:36, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

- As I said earlier, to starting discuss these subjects, I will follow Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle to reach a consensus. ( What you have done was "BOLD", What I am doing was "REVERT", and What we should do is "DISCUSS"). Instead of waiting for 3rd opinion and/or consensus, you continue to adding previous biased pieces. (Reverting to the biased edition and discussing) From your behaviour , what I understand is you are here to insist your ideas to the respected pages instead of discussing and finding a common ground. I am sorry but, I am not here make an edit war with you!Yakamoz51 (talk) 10:54, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gülenist Terror Organisation(FETO) (April 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 333-blue was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gülenist Terror Organisation(FETO) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

333 -blue 13:45, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Alasss123, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! 333 -blue 13:45, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jeppiz (talk) 14:47, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gülenist Terror Organisation(FETO) (April 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dodger67 was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Gülen movement instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This is a POV FORK of the existing article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gülenist Terror Organisation(FETO) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:32, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:Gülenist Terror Organisation(FETO)

Draft:Gülenist Terror Organisation(FETO), a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Gülenist Terror Organisation(FETO) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Gülenist Terror Organisation(FETO) during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 05:26, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]