User talk:Muj745

Welcome!

Hello, Muj745, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Mishae (talk) 15:31, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Muj745, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Muj745! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2014 FIFA World Cup qualification – CAF Second Round

Hi

Were do you follow the livescore? I am asking since i look at fifa.com and there are a few minutes left when you add the results. Are you sure the games has finished when you add the result? QED237 (talk) 18:53, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I guess I have to trust you, I just cant see that the games are finished when you add the results. I look here. QED237 (talk) 19:02, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013

Your recent editing history at 2014 FIFA World Cup qualification – CAF Second Round shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Monty ₈₄₅ 17:45, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Gabriel Batistuta may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

| 18. || 8 January 1995 || King Fahd International Stadium, [[Riyadh || {{fb|JPN}} || 5–1 || Win || [[1995 King Fahd Cup]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:10, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring on 2013–14 UEFA Europa League group stage

Hi.

I see you have been removing the same content now 4 times on 2013–14 UEFA Europa League group stageand you are therefore edit warring so I would like you to stop before page get protected and people get blocked. I do not understand why you remove the info. In 2012 PAOK got a three-match penalty meaning that they would play next 3 matches in front of closed doors. The third and last match of that penalty was against Karagandy and of course there should be a note for that. I see no resaon to remove the source just because it is from 2012, since it is the information about the penalty that lead to the closed doors at PAOK-Karagandy match. So please stop removing it (or find a better source if that is what you want). QED237 (talk) 11:07, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I think maybe I should have made the explanation earlier instead of all the reverting. I am glad we could solve this without users and/or pages getting blocked. QED237 (talk) 11:27, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Borderline in standings

Hi

I just opened a discussion at WT:FOOTY, at the section WT:FOOTY#Remove borderline in standings that i thought might be of your interest. One editor keeps inserting borderline in already completed standingstables and i think they should be removed as they always has been? There are no need for borders when group is finished and teams has background colors. I would appreciate your input on the issue. Thank you. QED237 (talk) 15:55, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Derby of Jordan

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Derby of Jordan, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.sportdw.com/2012/10/the-jordanian-derby-political-divides.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 22:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]