User talk:Amr.elmowaled

Welcome!

Hello, Amr.elmowaled, 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 Mustafa Kemal Ataküfr, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Storchy (talk) 14:55, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mustafa Kemal Ataküfr

The article Mustafa Kemal Ataküfr has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, with no indication of notability per Wikipedia:Neologism

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Storchy (talk) 14:55, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mustafa Kemal Ataküfr for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mustafa Kemal Ataküfr 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/Mustafa Kemal Ataküfr until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Storchy (talk) 15:35, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It don’t violate wikipedia rules, you can find an exact similar wiki page of “North Atlantic Terrorist Organization”

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Terrorist_Organization Amr.elmowaled (talk) 15:47, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Hello, I'm Adakiko. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Ibn al-Haytham, 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. Adakiko (talk) 07:39, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ibn al-Haytham

If possible, would you please add a more complete citations? There is a tool on the standard Wikipedia editor that will help generate a citation. If it's a book, an ISBN is useful to locate the book. A page number would help to find the entry in the book. A URL if it's available. Thank you! Adakiko (talk) 02:05, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Doug Weller talk 14:27, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You must follow these page-specific restrictions until you have 500 edits and have been here 30 days

For the purposes of editing restrictions in the ARBPIA topic area, the "area of conflict" shall be defined as encompassing

the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted ("primary articles"), and
edits relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict, to pages and discussions in all namespaces with the exception of userspace ("related content")

Also,

500/30 Rule: All IP editors, users with fewer than 500 edits, and users with less than 30 days' tenure are prohibited from editing content within the area of conflict. On primary articles, this prohibition is preferably to be enforced by use of extended confirmed protection (ECP) but this is not mandatory. On pages with related content, or on primary articles where ECP is not feasible, the 500/30 Rule may be enforced by other methods, including page protection, reverts, blocks, the use of pending changes, and appropriate edit filters. Reverts made solely to enforce the 500/30 Rule are not considered edit warring.

The sole exceptions to this prohibition are:

1. Editors who are not eligible to be extended-confirmed may use the Talk: namespace to post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive. Talk pages where disruption occurs may be managed by any of the methods noted in paragraph b). This exception does not apply to other internal project discussions such as AfDs, WikiProjects, RfCs, noticeboard discussions, etc.

2. Editors who are not eligible to be extended-confirmed may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by editors who do not meet the criteria is permitted but not required.

3. One Revert Restriction (1RR): Each editor is limited to one revert per page per 24 hours on any edits made to content within the area of conflict. Reverts made to enforce the 500/30 Rule are exempt from the provisions of this motion. Also, the normal exemptions apply. Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator.

Note that this means your edits on such pages (which you aren't yet eligible to make) may be reverted by anyone at any time. These restrictions are stricter than those in most other areas because of the problems that we've had in this area. Doug Weller talk 14:28, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Amr. As Doug Weller already told you, users need to have been here for more than 30 days (as you have) and made more than 500 edits (you have not) before editing related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Your latest edit to the Iran-Iraq War clearly violates this rule, as you used it to introduce your own claims of Israeli occupation and Palestinian resistance. Please pay attention to the rules outlined above. Jeppiz (talk) 22:31, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Doug Weller. Would you mind clarifying the 500/30 rule? Based on the wording and the placement of the comma, I read it as either 500 edits or 30 days, but not both (users who x, and users who y, versus users who x and who y). Is this the correct interpretation of the rule? Fionaussie (talk) 01:15, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022 - racist comments

Do not add slurs, images, symbols, or other content meant to attack, harass, threaten, or disparage certain people or groups based on nationality, race, ethnicity, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, or other factors. Such content is not tolerated by Wikipedia and as such may be hidden from public view at any time by an administrator (or in extreme cases, suppressed by oversighters). Articles or files of which the only purpose is to attack, harass, threaten or disparage certain people or groups are speedily deleted. If you add hateful, derogatory, or bigoted content again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Jeppiz (talk) 23:05, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Talk:State of Palestine) for a period of 2 weeks for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Doug Weller talk 12:04, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Iran–Iraq War, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 04:02, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Battle of al-Qadisiyyah, you may be blocked from editing. Trying to remove a very high-quality WP:RS through WP:TENDENTIOUS editing. - LouisAragon (talk) 19:15, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit on the Iran-Iraq war on the "the Palestinian resistance of Israeli occupation " was a clear breach of the sanctions

One more and I'll block you as it would appear that you would ignore or not comprehend a topic ban from the area. Doug Weller talk 11:07, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim conquest

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Slatersteven (talk) 14:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jeppiz (talk) 23:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. RickinBaltimore (talk) 23:56, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]