User talk:Banlhge453

Welcome!

Hi Banlhge453! 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! -- Toddy1 (talk) 16:08, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Hello, I'm Iskandar323. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Islamic attitudes towards science, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:51, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Banlhge453

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Banlhge453 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

I strongly advise you to use Talk:Aisha to discuss your proposed new paragraph for the article on Aisha. There is a good case for putting both your proposed paragraph and Androvie's proposed paragraph on the talk page.-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:08, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Aisha. 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. -- Toddy1 (talk) 16:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As noted below, I'm at least 50% responsible for this particular kerfuffle, having accidentally removed the edit with two reliable sources, so I think we need to give Banlhge453 a little bit of a break for getting frustrated and launching into a restoration spree. I hope we can resolve this all amicably on the talk. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

Hi. I need to apologise. In this edit, I had meant to undo only the most recent of your additions that was based solely on Islam Q&A (this one), as reflected in my edit comment. I had not meant to undo this edit, which I actually had very little problem with, although some of the less reliable sources were a little redundant. You may have noticed that I actually thanked you for it! Apologies for the mistake and the confusion it caused. Anyway, moving forward, please join us on the talk and we can resolve this. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:55, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Muhammad into Aisha. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 03:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring

Your recent editing history at Aisha 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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. Androvie (talk) 05:45, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You presented the two side of arguments regarding issue of Aisha's age and quoted individual scholars. However I've described this issue in a brief explanation. However another problem with your edit text is that you used sunnipath as your source which is not a reliable source. As far as I've already described the issue by saying that majority of Muslim scholars accept the view that Aisha was six at the time of marriage while some of them reject and present contrary view. That's the end of the issue. But you're constantly expanding the issue without any good reason. Expanding the issue and constantly quoting individual scholars would have serious consequences. Because both side have their arguments and as well as counter arguments and the discussion is not conclusive. So rather keep this issue in brief. Banlhge453 (talk) 07:31, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Iskandar323 has already resolved the issue. Banlhge453 (talk) 07:52, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is nevertheless true that you made at least three reverts in the past 24 hours. Please read WP:3RR.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:10, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, he has not, the discussion is still ongoing on Aisha's talk page, Sunnipath's reliability has been confirmed by Dragoon17, as well as the other sources I have presented, and an admin has allowed the use of Gibril Haddad's statement from livingislam as long as it is attributed to him, which I did. Furthermore please continue the conversation on Aisha's talk page, not here. Androvie (talk) 09:55, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

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. Androvie (talk) 13:40, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 17:52, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]