User talk:68.100.172.139

Please stop

Please do not tag editors as suspected sockpuppets without clear evidence. --Jayron32 02:38, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'd identified them as middle school students..

68.100.172.139 (talk) 05:16, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes. How old are you? 3? Keivan.f^Talk 06:46, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain

I really don't want to get in an edit war with you. So instead of accusing me to be a sock of Biar122 explain why you add images like this to the articles of Ottoman consorts. Because I reverted your edits it doesn't mean that my edits are vandalism. I just removed those images because they're really unnecessary and just take huge spaces. If you take a look at those articles with a tablet, you'll understand what I'm saying. Please just don't add photos like this because of your own interest. If someone really wants to see Ottoman sultans portraits, s/he can visit their articles and for more images s/he can visit wiki commons. Keivan.f^Talk 07:06, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my edit when I removed Albanian-stub and Ottoman-stub from Safiye Sultan's article, but when Revent did the same you said: You did good in removing Ottoman-stub and Albanian-stub. So what's your problem with me? I never had such problems with other users or IP users. Keivan.f^Talk 08:34, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete any information from wikipedia unless they are wrong.

68.100.172.139 (talk) 13:53, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think you're the boss here and anyone doesn't know anything except you? I shouldn't ask you if I want to edit an article. Were they really important information that you reverted my edit? Please compares edits in the history page to see what other users have done with the article. Then revert them with expalanation. Keivan.f^Talk 16:21, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because a discussion or the material of an article isn't like the thing you want, you shouldn't accuse other users of being a sock of a blocked user. I can also say that you're Biar122 and you're avoiding from creating a new account because you're scared of becoming blocked again! Keivan.f^Talk 16:31, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how Wikipedia works. You need to read WP:VERIFY, WP:RS, WP:NOR and WP:NPOV. Or WP:42 which says:

Significant coverage

Significant coverage in sources is required to show that a topic meets the general notability guideline (GNG). This means sources that discuss the topic directly and in detail. Not: passing mentions, directory listings, or any old thing that happens to have the name in it.

Reliable sources

We need reliable sources. Usually this means that the publisher has a reputation for fact checking. These might be newspapers, books, or periodicals. Not: forums, fansites, MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, or most blogs.

Independent sources

We need independent sources. Not: articles written by the topic, paid for by the topic, their website, or press releases.

Verifiability

We want readers to be able to verify that Wikipedia articles are not just made up. To do this, cite the information in your article. Non-independent reliable sources can be used for verifiability.

I hope this helps. Dougweller (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Your recent editing history at List of mothers of the Ottoman sultans 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. 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. Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 15:35, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Sources and Alevism

Since we disagree about sources, and since you have strong opinions who should be allowed to edit the Alevism page, please give your opinion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Alevism Thank you Edging (talk) 20:01, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Family tree of Muhammad

An article that you have been involved in editing—Family tree of Muhammad —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 89.240.87.162 (talk) 20:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.