User talk:Ed 850

January 2018

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Acroterion (talk) 17:22, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Acroterion (talk) 17:23, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I only added 7 references, in pages that desperately needed references. Do you mind checking the references that I added? I think if you do, you will see that they are very relevant to the topic and absolutely needed. -Ed 850

Spamming references

I see that every reference you have added to Wikipedia was written by Ezzat Bakhoum. The practice of adding lots of references by one writer is described at the guideline WP:REFSPAM. The problem with the practice is that it demonstrates an interest in promoting the writer rather than improving the encyclopedia. Binksternet (talk) 17:38, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sir: I only added 7 references, in pages that desperately needed references. If you look at those references, you will see that they are very relevant to the topic. - Ed 850

Two references by the same author is coincidence. Seven by the same author is a pattern. Plus, in some cases, there were already references cited, so we did not need another. —C.Fred (talk) 17:49, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mind checking the references that I added? I think if you do, you will see that they are very relevant to the topic and absolutely needed. - Ed 850

You have not addressed the main point, that Ezzat Bakhoum was the writer of every reference you added. You even named Bakhoum explicitly in this edit. It looks like your goal is to promote Bakhoum. You could have quoted Knapp, Wolf, Ligon, van Limpt, Farnsworth-Hirsch, Chap, Sedwick, Rogers, MacLeod, Yuly, Stano, Raèko, Moynihan, McCarthy, Bernards or Wallich, but you chose Bakhoum. Binksternet (talk) 18:13, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is true, Sir. I am not disputing your observation. But once again, I simply ask that you check those articles by Dr. Bakhoum. I think if you do, you will see that they are very relevant to the topics on Wikipedia and absolutely needed. If you conclude that any of those references does not add value to the page where it is posted, then I perfectly agree that it should be deleted. - Ed 850

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Per:diff diff diff you seem to be adding papers by a specific author (Bakhoum) that are off topic - promoting a single device/procedure instead of being about the topic in general. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 22:33, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. 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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 03:00, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have persisted in describing those who express concern about your insertion of references pointing to a single individual over a broad range of articles as "sick persons" after being explicit;ly warned to stop. That is not acceptable, and you have never addressed the substance of their concerns. Acroterion (talk) 03:02, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]