User talk:Sir blue

Hello

Hello!

Help

Salaam,

Shoma mitooneed komamakam koneed?

Chera man nemitavam maghaleh dorost va ba naam e dorost ijad konam? دکتر براتی (talk) 10:33, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ali Milani for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ali Milani is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ali Milani until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. FirefoxLSD (talk) 18:19, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Parham Alizadeh for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Parham Alizadeh is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parham Alizadeh until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. PK650 (talk) 04:18, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-and-paste move

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Night of Bara'at a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge.

I have now repaired your work by merging the page history of the article Night of Bara'at into Shab-e-barat, but please do not do it again. – Fayenatic London 11:15, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Hello, I'm VeryRarelyStable. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Phoenicia have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. —VeryRarelyStable 03:30, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Laurence Waddell. 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. —VeryRarelyStable 03:32, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, According to Wikipedia:External links there was no problem with this edit [1], if necessary I am ready to talk whenever you feel ready, in talk page of the Laurence Waddell article in this regard, Sir blue (talk) 03:40, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Works by Waddell might be considered to be appropriate links for the External Links section of his article. However, that section already contains a link to a collection of them. Singling out two to link outside of that context suggests, inappropriately and incorrectly, that these are works of particular merit or notability. You have also added those links to pages on the topics which Waddell was discussing, which was highly inappropriate since they fall woefully short of WP:RS. —VeryRarelyStable 04:32, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sir blue! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 19:43, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. multiple articles Doug Weller talk 19:45, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Admin User:Doug Weller,

Works of an author in the author article is not spam, [2] I hereby ask people to do not revert the correct edits without any talks in talk-page, sincerely yours, Sir blue (talk) 12:01, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that User:VeryRarelyStable or I have missed the fact that you are spamming a disgusting anti-semitic racist website[3] apparently claiming falsely that Leo Frank was guilty and commemorating the life of William Luther Pierce. Doug Weller talk 12:17, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of reverting you may simply say that you don't like the main page of that website, those links was simply works of Laurence Waddell, ... I don't know Leo Frank nor William Luther Pierce, I will try to find another source for Laurence Waddell works. Sir blue (talk) 12:29, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, Thanks, Sir blue (talk) 12:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I simply don't know anything about that website main page, & for sure I wish you guys had told that sooner, instead of just reverting, Sincerely Yours, Sir blue (talk) 12:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sir User:Doug Weller, if that website is that bad, please do blacklist that, Thanks, Sir blue (talk) 12:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The links are still inappropriate. As I've already pointed out to you more than once, if you look just five lines up in the "External links" section, you will see the line "Works written by or about Laurence Waddell at Wikisource." That line links to a collection of Waddell's works here, including the ones you have been linking to. Scroll up a bit further and you will find a "Published books" section, which provides more information including the titles of the works you have been linking to. Linking to those works a third time adds no further information that was not already given.

What it does do, however, is give the false impression that those particular works have some particular merit or importance. They do not. Therefore, the links are inappropriate.

I will further point out that repeatedly reverting other editors' changes is called WP:Edit warring and is not acceptable behaviour on Wikipedia.

—VeryRarelyStable 22:59, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minor flag

Hi Sir blue! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Bardiya that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia – it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. PatGallacher (talk) 20:58, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is this edit [4], wrong? Sir blue (talk) 06:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]