User talk:Adountersw

December 2015
Hello, I'm Gaelan. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Mohammed bin Jassim Al Thani with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. (talk to) Gaelan('s contributions) 08:06, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

June 2016
Hello, I'm Vensco. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Mohammed al-Ajami has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Vensco (T / C) 00:35, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Qatar has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. ''Please read WP:NOTVAND. If you dispute the changes, please state why on the article's talk page.'' Neil N  talk to me 04:04, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Qatar. 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 editing privileges. 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 lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Neil N  talk to me 04:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Qatar. 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. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 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.

I agree with you that Qatar is a constitutional monarchy, not an absolute monarchy. But for some reason there are reliable sources giving both points of view. Wikipedia is based on reliable sources, not on our opinion. If you want to pursue this, you need to find reliable sources saying why some people claim that Qatar is an absolute monarchy. If you could find this, you would be able to explain in the article why the claims that it is an absolute monarchy are mistaken.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)