User talk:Embarkedaxis

Welcome!

Hello, Embarkedaxis, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! - MPF 17:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mango in Pakistan

Hi Embarkedaxis - I notice you have added Pakistan to the list of places where mango is native. I have checked all the species listed at the Germplasm Resources Information Network List of Mangifera species, and none are listed as native in Pakistan; the mango is only an introduced cultivated plant there. If you think it should be added to the native area list again, please could you provide verification of its native status in Pakistan. - Thanks, MPF 17:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Halva in Pakistan

I've arranged the Countries and Regions in Halva in alphabetical order. Why did you change them? Sjschen 18:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Orange (fruit)

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. . If you'd followed the citation in the article, and edited correctly, you wouldn't have got this warning. Stop disrupting Wikipedia. Stephenb (Talk) 17:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Three-revert rule

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. —Khoikhoi 21:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, why do you keep deleting the link to [[[Conflict between Pakistan and Baloch warlords in Balochistan|this article]]? Please provide an explanation. —Khoikhoi 05:01, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto on Mango. You claim in your edit summary "havent deleted any link", yet you have deleted the following wiki links, without giving any reasons: tree, flowering plant, Anacardiaceae, Southeast Asia, Hindu, Vedas, Tamil language, frost, Indian subcontinent, North America, South America, Central America, Caribbean, Africa, Australia, agriculture, cultivar, turpentine, Cattle, testicle, Hawaiian Islands, South Florida, chutney, chile pepper, Lime (Citrus aurantifolia), Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, orchard, Alphonso (mango), Ratnagiri, Devgad, Maharashtra, and the external link [1]. In addition, you have also removed the bold and italic formatting in the lead line, and altered the page to a point of view which is not reflected in authoritative sources. Any further such activity, which is regarded as vandalism, will result in your being blocked from further editing. - MPF 13:08, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for 48 hours for repeated vandalism of Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. - MPF 16:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --—Khoikhoi 05:36, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Balochistan conflict

Your recent edit to Balochistan conflict was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 08:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked again

You've been blocked again for repeated vandalism. Please stop, and make productive edits instead. Your position has a little bit of merit behind it, but your approach is all wrong. Please use talk pages before making edits instead of just repeating the same vandalism. If you can do that, you're welcome to return to editing when your block expires, but if you can't, it will be extended again. You can edit this talk page while you are blocked, so use that as a chance to demonstrate good faith. - Taxman ^Talk 16:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chai

Why don't you once, one single time, actually include the Urdu form of the word Chai -- as you have been constantly claiming to do, but in fact have never done yet? AnonMoos 01:03, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About your edit to Talk:Muhammad

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Nehwyn 12:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. Please note that page blanking, addition of random text or spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, and other deliberate attempts to disrupt Wikipedia are considered vandalism. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires.

NCurse _work 14:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss appropriateness of Maomé image on talk:Muhammad

Hi, I notice that you removed the Maomé image from the Muhammad article. Please express your opinions on talk:Muhammad so that other editors may be aware of your opinions. Also, I have filed a request for mediatation regarding the image. Please express whether you are willing to participate in mediation. I understand that the requests that I have made from you are time consuming. However, I believe that the issue will not be resolved by a series of reverts without open and honest discussion. Thank you. --BostonMA ^talk 01:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

October 19, 2006

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. As a member of the Wikipedia community, I would like to remind you of Wikipedia's neutral-point-of-view policy for editors. In the meantime, please be bold and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you! --Rory096 23:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Rory096 23:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

October 20, 2006

Regarding edits made during October 20 2006 (UTC) to Muhammad

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages or sections with blank content. It is considered vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. —Ryūlóng (竜龍) 10:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits made during October 20 2006 (UTC) to Depictions of Muhammad

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages or sections with blank content, as you did here. It is considered vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 17:01, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits made during October 20 2006 (UTC) to Muhammad's marriages

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Nehwyn 17:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on Muhammad. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked

You have been blocked for 3RR violation at Muhammad for a period of 24 hours. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Luna Santin 20:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, edit summaries like this should stop. Please keep a cool head in disputes, and please especially remain civil and avoid personal attacks, or you may find yourself blocked again. You're welcome to return, but I encourage you to reconsider some of your behavior, and to commit yourself to discussing disagreements instead of revert warring. Luna Santin 21:02, 20 October 2006 (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).

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

Request reason:

Dear Luna santin...Dont you see patstuart? I am always in bahaviour... he first attacked on my personality he said "exposedaxis" n all.. be justice... i always talk nice with my wikipedia fellows... n i love to contribute in wikipedia he first attack on me... you didnt do same with him... i am very unhappy with this unjustice.. but stil loves to read and contribute for wikipedia

Decline reason:

"If u dont know how to respect others you are not human you are animal" looks really really not good when determining this unblock, can you take a few hours and try and think it over.... you're both on 24 hours.... a little cool-off time I think will save tempers from flying here. -- Tawker 03:39, 21 October 2006 (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.

Your edits to Muhammad article

Hi, I notice that you make a point of removing references to the term Mahound in the Muhammad article. I would very much appreciate it if you would try to articulate the concerns you have with the text that you remove, so that your concerns may be discussed. Repeated removal without discussion doesn't help editors to understand. Thanks. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 23:28, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

Oh Thanks Boston Ma for telling me. Mahound term was used by one or two peoples so it doesnt mean that it is his name's variant. And it is already there in Non-Muslim veiw of Muhammad. So there is no point to keep this word in variant. People are villify by many people but that doesnt mean it is his name variant. Everyone know the defination of variant. And 2ndly some people add this just because they hate him and wikipedia policy is neutral. So i want to keep this article away from skepticism, So that both muslims and non muslims would not be offended. Thanks you User:Embarkedaxis

Thank-you for your explanation. Unfortunately, there may be something of a language barrier between you and I. Someone else may have better understanding than myself. Please allow me to express what I think your points are, and you may correct me if I misunderstand.

Mahound is an unusual variant of the name Muhammad
Mahound was not the variant of the name Muhammad that was used by the prophet
Mahound is, and has been used by those who are villifying Muhammad
You believe the editors are including the name in order offend Muslims (i.e. to push an anti-Islamic point of view.)

Are these things correct?

There is an article called Mahound. I would very much like to know if you think anything is incorrect about the article. I would also like to know if you have any objections to the article. It may be that people see the the term Mahound in print and wonder what it means. This article (i.e. Mahound should not villify Muhammad but it should help readers who are unfamiliar to know what is being talked about. Please let me know what you think, and thank you so much for your time. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 00:35, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please also vote here Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mahound. --- ابراهيم 13:54, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing information from Muhammad

Hello, when editing articles that are contreversial please discuss on the talk page and respect consensus. It is always a good idea to give your reasoning in an edit summery.

An edit where you remove information without discussion or edit summery is likely to be reverted. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:14, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalizing the Depictions of Muhammad article

Greetings, kindly cease your blanking of this article as it is in effect vandalism. If you continue blanking you will eventually be subject to blocking. Thanks. (→Netscott) 10:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I have blocked you for a week for deleting the images at Depictions of Muhammad. Tom Harrison ^Talk 22:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR Warning

Greetings, please be aware that you are out of accord with the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule on the Muhammad article. You are likely to be blocked for this and similar edit warring if it continues. (→Netscott) 14:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the message you left on my talk page here is why you recieved a warning:

previous version

rv1
rv2
rv3
rv4 (all in the span of 24 hours).

No one else has reverted as many times as yourself in the last 24 hours. (→Netscott) 01:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Repeat vandalism

You have been warned before, and so you certainly know that your removal of images from the Muhammad article constitutes vandalism. Your last block was for one week. Upon returning, you continue the same actions that got you blocked before. Persistent, deliberate vandalism of this nature could get you permanently blocked from editing. SWAdair 08:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammed Depictions mediation

We are having a mediation considering the depictions of Mohammed, and I heavily encourage you to join now before it is too late, especially given that one of your primary concerns on this encyclopedia has been about removing these images. If you wait, your position will not be included in the discussion, and any attempts to disrupt the agreement will be ignored. So please, come and participate while you can. :) Talk:Muhammad/Mediation. If you want to talk to the mediator about coming in late, his name is Aguerriero. Thanks. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

202.147.179.191 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Tendentious editor continues edit warring

Blocking administrator: not provided.

Decline reason: You have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock | your reason here}} to the bottom of your talk page, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.