User talk:MalakiTT

MalakiTT, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi MalakiTT! 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 MrClog (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, MalakiTT, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:20, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Id Kah Mosque. 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 their editing privileges on that page. 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 result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 21:50, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please use edit summaries

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 17:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. Thanks! Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 09:00, 12 June 2021 (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. Thank you. Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 12:18, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Id Kah Mosque

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 ~~~~}}.

The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. EdJohnston (talk) 04:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:MalakiTT - your first edit after being blocked for edit warring is to go back and make the same edit that got you blocked originally, [1]. At Talk:Id Kah Mosque, editors agree that the mosque should not be described as a "former mosque," because it still hosts worshippers, according to multiple recent newspaper reports. Please undo your action, participate in discussion with other editors, and stop edit warring - otherwise you will almost certainly be blocked from editing again. -Darouet (talk) 13:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Darouet, this is precisely the kind of comment that helps admins--you pointed out a recurring problem, and guess what, it's still happening. So thanks. Mikehawk10, I saw your DS notification, but this is going to be either just a regular block, maybe a very long one, or a partial block for this article--I'm about to go through their edits to see what else is there, and what's most appropriate. Drmies (talk) 23:08, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MalakiTT, you are blocked from editing Id_Kah_Mosque for three months. If that expires and you go there again for the same thing, you might well be blocked indefinitely from editing anything. And here is another thing: you are not blocked from editing the talk page, which is where Wikipedia editors go to suggest edits and discuss article content. I'm pointing this out because in your 113 edits here you have made NOT A SINGLE talk page edit, and you managed only seven edit summaries--and you were asked a long time ago to provide edit summaries. I'll remind you that this is a collaborative project, and that the disruptive quality of edit warring as you did is aggravated by a lack of explanation and a refusal to discuss matters. In other words, at some point WP:NOTHERE applies. Don't let it get that far. Drmies (talk) 23:14, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Despite being blocked previously, you go back once again to make controversial edits on this article. Once your block was expired, you are free to edit this article as anyone else is, however it would be expected that you have learned from your previous warnings and stick to making substantiated edits rather than rewording things in your own point of view. Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 08:39, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Community Sanctions Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Uyghur genocide. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

— Mikehawk10 (talk) 23:05, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Type 055 destroyer infobox contents

I have, for the most part, reverted your additions. The way the weapons are listed in the article now is, in terms of level of detail, in the ballpark found in other articles, like:

It broadly fits at least one way of doing things that is widely used, and I see no reason to deviate in the manner you've suggested. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 05:54, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]