User talk:Humanrightsuae
Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that you recently removed some content without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Materialscientist (talk) 10:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
February 2015
[edit]
Your recent editing history at United Arab Emirates 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. Deunanknute (talk) 13:17, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
June 2016
[edit]
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Qatar, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. NeilN talk to me 13:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
- I have supplied reliable source in the talk page of Qatar article. Reliable source that mention Qatar as absolute monarchy. Including CIA factbook and Canada embassy to Qatar. so you can now redit the article and change it to the correct sentence, which is "Qatar is absolute monarchy", used the source from the talk page, they are reliable. Good luck. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/qa.html http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/qatar/bilateral_relations_bilaterales/index.aspx?lang=eng&pedisable=true
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Qatar with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Kaobear (talk) 16:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Qatar. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you.-- Toddy1 (talk) 06:03, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
I strongly advise that you contribute to Talk:Qatar. If you understand the rules on edit warring, you will understand why you need to use the article talk page. If the other editor continues to edit-war report him/her to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:40, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Humanrightsuae. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)