User talk:Zahin346

Zahin346, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Zahin346! 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 experienced editors like Rosiestep (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Cristiano Ronaldo

Hi Zahin, please bare in mind that we are not a rolling news service, we are an encyclopedia. We should list notable events in a players career only. Ronaldo will have hundreds of goals not listed here so not scoring in a match is even less relevant to his career, thanks. Kosack (talk) 07:07, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please cease adding non-notable content to Ronaldo's article. You have been reverted by several editors now who have all explained why the content included is not significant enough for inclusion. your claims of a Messi bias do not hold any water (you can check my edit history, I have never ever edited the Messi article to my knowledge in over 10 years). Koncorde (talk) 16:21, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"I have never ever edited the Messi article to my knowledge in over 10 years". But you're dying to keep relevant info from Cristiano page. I'm wondering why. Well then you better start editing that Messi page immediately after you see this message. That wiki page lists every goal and assist scored by Messi in each matchday and also divides his club career into individual seasons. That wiki also has been nominated for being edited nicely. Have a nice day.--Zahin346 (talk) 18:34, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because what you are adding is crap. Because other editors raised your appalling behaviour and attitude at the WP:FOOTBALL talk page to discuss your behaviour. I have read the Messi article, I do not see every goal listed. I do not see needless goals listed. I even summarised a paragraph for you.

This is now your 3RR warning. You have not established consensus for your changes which are not seen as being constructive. Koncorde (talk) 20:03, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My Response

Why will Ronaldo not have 100s of goals listed here? What's the reason? All of his goals and assists should be listed here. Zahin346 (talk) 08:21, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No they shouldn't, as I said we are an encyclopedia not an WP:INDISCRIMINATE statistical record of his career. We detail notable moments of his life, not everything that ever happens to him. Kosack (talk) 08:25, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All of his goals and assists are "notable" moments in his life. He himself has said that multiple times. You are no one to decide which one is related and which one not.Your job is to update the page based on the matches he played. Btw This page doesn't detail "everything that ever happens to him".

As I have said, we don't detail every goal a player ever scores, check any footballer page you wish. Tens of thousands of goals are scored every season across the world, we don't list every single one. Kosack (talk) 08:40, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is no law stating that you cannot list every single goal or assist scored by a football player. You may do so if you wish as long as you following referencing and other stuff properly.

Actually there are several rules confirming this, see WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:NOTSTATS, WP:Summary style. Just because something is sourced, that doesn't mean it's relevant to an encyclopedia article. Kosack (talk)

I don't see where it is stated that detailing all goals and assists of a player in the shortest way possible is being hampering the rules.

From WP:STATS: "As explained in Encyclopedic content above, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia". Ronaldo has scored 500+ goals in his career, listing all of them, even in the shortest way possible, would lead to an article of astronomical size. An encyclopedia covers notable events of a subject's career, not everything they did during their careers. Kosack (talk) 10:07, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This will be my last response. You are just a pathetic hater of Ronaldo. Why is the SPAL goal relevant? Why are you relevant? Keep undoing my works and I will keep undoing your undoings. good day

I've brought the matter to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Cristiano Ronaldo given your statement of continuing to edit war, cheers. Kosack (talk) 10:28, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTDIARY explicitly states Not every match played or goal scored is significant enough to be included in the biography of a person Spike 'em (talk) 10:36, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Like Kosack said, we do not need a play-by-play (or goal-by-goal) biography. Milestones, "important goals" (late goal to advance, scoring in a final...) should be added. No one is a hater, that's how it is on wiki, else some footballer would have massive articles. Kante4 (talk) 10:38, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially a List of Christiano Ronaldo goals could be a thing... But certainly not on the main article, as per the arguements on WP:STATS and WP:INDESCRIMINATE as above. Wikipedia doesn't much care for what the subject says about themselves. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:12, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Your recent editing history at Cristiano Ronaldo shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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. Koncorde (talk) 20:05, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Zahin346 reported by User:Spike 'em (Result: ). Thank you. Spike 'em (talk) 23:36, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 23:40, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're lucky I'm an old person and don't know what "salty fuchs" means. Now, stop edit warring/editing against consensus, or your next block might be much longer. Drmies (talk) 23:41, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Haha you fuckers care too much for this stuff to think I'm lucky to have averted a ban. I don't give a fuck you old hag whether or not I am banned. I have a life and I hereby give up trying to edit this bullshit page managed by the most biased and incompetent of editors. Go fuck yourself!!!