Jump to content

User talk:Aleenf1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aleenf1 (talk | contribs) at 11:54, 20 July 2023 (→July 2023: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

March 2023

Information icon Hello, I'm Sportsfan 1234. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Hockey at the Commonwealth Games that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it, i'm waiting for more of your inconsistency. Aleenf1 13:22, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2022 Asian Games. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Please review WP:MSE event articles. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 16:03, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP:ICONS, and how to obey Manual of Style, rather than making threat here. This doesn't mean you start a project, you can disobey MOS, where MOS:TOOMANY already explained when icons are added excessively, they clutter the page and become redundant. The icons has been available in the events calendar, where it already become redundant. When it not strongly enforced, you "think" everything should be follow it on your manner. --Aleenf1 16:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
These also included your violation for MOS:DECOR, icons should serve an encyclopedic purpose and not merely be decorative. When you likely to oppose for adding an icons just to serve for decoration rather than informative. --Aleenf1 16:20, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2022 Asian Games. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 17:46, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Still unable to explain the situation of failing to obey MOS:ICONS. --Aleenf1 01:26, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon 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:Aleenf1 reported by User:Sportsfan 1234 (Result: ). Thank you. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:44, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't affect me, while i'm blocked, i'm still fighting, at least you mean not to to discuss. --Aleenf1 01:56, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Timothytyy

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports) § Proposal for removing NBAD criteria 1 and 3. Timothytyy (talk) 12:39, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

#

Edition should be noted in roman.

hi. Can you tell what law underlines this? Show me its rule.

In the following article it is the opposite.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFC_Asian_Cup#Format

The official logo of the games also uses English numbers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2022_Asian_Games_logo.svg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1998_Asian_Games_logo.svg

and ... .

If you don't have a convincing answer, I can revert the edit. In addition, many other multi-sport competitions on Wikipedia do not use Roman numerals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Viexo (talk • contribs) 19:34, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Portalian: Hi, I would like you to help me. I anglicized the Asian game numbers but this user romanized it. I messaged twice for several days. The user is not willing to interact and respond. I want to know your opinion. Because I saw in the edits that you edited this article. Pan American Games, FISU World University Games and Many other articles use English numbers. The official logos of the games do not have Roman numerals. The use of Roman numerals was related to the past Olympics because it was held for the first time in Greece. Today, the use of Roman numerals is obsolete.Viexo (talk) 16:54, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just a reminder

Hello,

Just passing by to remind (just in case) that i had done some replies on your talk in Talk:2023 FIFA Women's World Cup broadcasting rights

It had been quite a lot since I posted that replies, and you and the the other editor had not also replied top that reply, i decided send this reminder for you and him so we can finsh this issue as fast as possible

Also please, read the side notes i had put on that reples, i had noticied that maybe some mistake is happening with you and the another editor fusing two different edits into a single basket, the India edit is not related for this case.

I am open to any talks there, please dont be afraid to talk there, i will be open to reply ASP, as long we can reach a consensus, I just want finsh this before the kickoff of the first game tomorrow. Meganinja202 (talk) 15:42, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as you did at 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup broadcasting rights. 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 at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Aoidh (talk) 10:29, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Aleenf1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Sorry i didn't vandalise as reported, and where is consensus the reporter said about, the reporter also engaged in edit warring without any consensus, I'm just correct what have been doing wrong. As you can see the reporter also reverted even that's error.
You can see language is not the matter, which he seems ignored, he try to warn, where he warn me about, he seems trying hard to defend his editing even that's factual error. Aleenf1 10:35, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Sorry i didn't vandalise as reported, and where is consensus the reporter said about, the reporter also engaged in edit warring without any consensus, I'm just correct what have been doing wrong. As you can see the reporter also reverted even that's error.<br> You can see language is not the matter, which he seems ignored, he try to warn, where he warn me about, he seems trying hard to defend his editing even that's factual error. [[User:Aleenf1|Aleen]][[User talk:Aleenf1|<span style="color: black">f</span><span style="color: red">1</span>]] 10:35, 20 July 2023 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Sorry i didn't vandalise as reported, and where is consensus the reporter said about, the reporter also engaged in edit warring without any consensus, I'm just correct what have been doing wrong. As you can see the reporter also reverted even that's error.<br> You can see language is not the matter, which he seems ignored, he try to warn, where he warn me about, he seems trying hard to defend his editing even that's factual error. [[User:Aleenf1|Aleen]][[User talk:Aleenf1|<span style="color: black">f</span><span style="color: red">1</span>]] 10:35, 20 July 2023 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Sorry i didn't vandalise as reported, and where is consensus the reporter said about, the reporter also engaged in edit warring without any consensus, I'm just correct what have been doing wrong. As you can see the reporter also reverted even that's error.<br> You can see language is not the matter, which he seems ignored, he try to warn, where he warn me about, he seems trying hard to defend his editing even that's factual error. [[User:Aleenf1|Aleen]][[User talk:Aleenf1|<span style="color: black">f</span><span style="color: red">1</span>]] 10:35, 20 July 2023 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
The block is for edit warring, not for vandalism. You were just blocked for edit warring on June 28 and just made 6 reverts within 24 hours on 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup broadcasting rights, going well past WP:3RR. - Aoidh (talk) 10:40, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoidh: Even is correct the wrong things count as edit warring, good job you, ignore my request. You all getting horror by letting someone bypass. --Aleenf1 10:43, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoidh: Getting hard to get the things right back the correct way with right things, looks like i have to let it turn bad and erosive. What is the point of MOS and rules. --Aleenf1 10:47, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's edit warring even if you believe that you are correct. There are exceptions to 3RR but believing you are correct is not one of them. Per WP:Edit warring: Claiming "My edits were right, so it wasn't edit warring" is not a valid defense. I should also note that you are aware of 3RR, as you warned another editor of it before immediately continuing to edit war one minute later. If you have a disagreement with another editor the solution is to seek dispute resolution using something like WP:3O, WP:DRN, or WP:RFC, not by edit-warring. - Aoidh (talk) 10:48, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoidh: Is the reporter also seeking dispute resolution? While i'm talking on talk page, he just one way song, its okay, the editor also might aware but you let it go, good job, you claimed he is "unaware". --Aleenf1 10:52, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a diff showing that the other editor was or should have been aware of 3RR before they made those reverts? - Aoidh (talk) 10:56, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoidh: The truth is with this block, you can let people put wrong things and run away, while people need to cleanup the messed punished, good luck Wikipedia. Hope you find yourself great with your administrator ship. And maybe is time for me to put the note after 18 years. --Aleenf1 10:59, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You see where is ANT1 come from, a Greek broadcaster showing in Cyprus? Where is Venezuela broadcaster come from, i check not even the broadcaster making that path, while keep rolling back to defend, is he even check his edit? Or just come to defend his edit, what a ridiculous... --Aleenf1 11:04, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Even i'm rolling back, i'm still re-add the legit entry he added, not just blatantly revert. Bullshit all. --Aleenf1 11:05, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoidh: Is it unaware or is it defending? Please speak to me, if is it unaware why know to report? How you judge people of unawareness? Please see Talk:2023 FIFA Women's World Cup broadcasting rights, at least an editor warn about, is it he "unaware" as you mentioned. --Aleenf1 11:23, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, I am not sure what you're asking me. If you're asking why I told the other editor on their talk page that I did not block them because they appeared to not know about 3RR, it is because I could find no evidence that they were ever previously warned about or mentioned 3RR and therefore may very well have not known about it, reinforced by the fact that they did not make any further reverts after being made aware of 3RR. By contrast you are demonstrably aware of 3RR as you warned them of it while making reverts yourself, and have been blocked for edit warring previously. - Aoidh (talk) 11:37, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoidh: Talk:2023 FIFA Women's World Cup broadcasting rights, that's talk, and you mentioned "unaware", good job. You are fooling me by saying "unaware" while that's mention of avoid edit war on article talk page. Fully respect your perspective. Okay, i let it go. Thanks for your blocking. My job done --Aleenf1 11:42, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to this edit that mentions "edit war" in passing without any mention of 3RR or elaboration on what edit warring is, I saw that and that is a far cry from being notified about WP:3RR. Once the editor was notified of 3RR, they stopped reverting. You did not. - Aoidh (talk) 11:48, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoidh: "Once the editor was notified of 3RR", do i been notified? Okay your point is right and other people are wrong, administrator knowing how to punished people only. I hope more hoax information added. My wishes always come true. --Aleenf1 11:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No need unblocks, i will only edit on IP now, even you can make it permanent. Bye. --Aleenf1 11:44, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Aleenf1&oldid=1166261133"