User talk:Heckmat21

July 2018
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Saffron. Zefr (talk) 21:38, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

This is your truly last warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. 'show you can contribute and i will remove your AIV report'' JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 21:52, 27 July 2018 (UTC)


 * , I have reverted a few of Heckmat21's edits but through the chance revert of one of my reverts by, I have noticed there appears to be more to this. Heckmat21 has added to the introduction that Iran is the largest producer of certain nuts and carpets. There is some support for this in two of three articles I just double checked. Even if the data is a few years old, it seems to be supportable. Part of the problem here is that Heckmat21's edit summary says "added new information." It is natural to assume that without a reference this new information is at least questionable and should be sourced. If the edit summary had said that it was an addition of important information (?) supported in the text, it might not have been reverted, or at least would have been a good faith edit to the introduction and Huggle users could have looked further. This type of later support can't be seen in Huggle and it would be unusual to suspect it existed given the edit summary. In one article, however, I did not find the support. There were a few others that I did not check but may be good faith edits.


 * Heckmat21: Please be more accurate and specific in your edit summaries. Edit summaries. In some instances it might be better to just cite again the supporting information, which was already available in some or most of the articles you edited. It also would have been helpful if you had explained your edits to the users who were reverting them so that they could see your point and the warnings probably would not have built up.


 * Helpful information about editing Wikipedia can be found on various Wikipedia guideline and policy pages including: Help:Getting started; Introduction; Simplified ruleset; Simplified Manual of Style; Referencing for beginners; Identifying reliable sources; Citing sources; Help:Footnotes; Verifiability; No original research; Neutral point of view; Notability; Biographies of living persons; What Wikipedia is not; Manual of Style/Words to watch; Help:Introduction to talk pages; Copyright Problems and Help:Contents. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 23:03, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Cluebot reported Heckmat21 to AIV, as did Home Lander.JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 23:12, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note that all of Heckmat21's entries today were similar to this: "The Islamic Republic of Iran is the largest saffron producer in the world" and were part of a string (6 edits in less than 3 hrs) on the Saffron article here combined with those of the possible sockpuppet 83.120.122.154. The edits were noted as "fixed typo" or "add new information" without regard for lede content or recognizing that a section on Trade already stated it. The same statement was made on numerous other articles today, indicating generally disruptive behavior. --Zefr (talk) 23:50, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * , I had noticed the deficiencies in the edit summaries and overall pattern. As I noted, I reverted some of the user's edits. Having noticed there was some support for the fact that Iran was the leading producer of at least two commodities, I thought perhaps the user was simply somewhat clueless and not necessarily disruptive. The overall pattern and additional information provided by you both, and the failure of the user to take more careful steps or make reasonable explanations, seem to indicate that the intent was more disruptive. I had hoped that this was simply a user that might be instructed to do better. Maybe not. While this type of examination and effort is rarely worth it, occasionally I have run across an apparently disruptive user (not an immediately obvious outright vandal) who might be persuaded to edit productively - or maybe to give it up if that is too much effort. Thank you both for the additional information and followup. Donner60 (talk) 02:25, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

It's ok. It's best to move on. There was enough editors (me, Home Lander, Zefr and even Cluebot) to make me feel confident it was the right move. Remember Cluebot reported Heckmat21 before Home Lander did. JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 02:29, 28 July 2018 (UTC)