User talk:Inuit18

Jamalludin Afghan
come with your academic sources on talk page on Jamalludin Afghan اباسینAbasin 02:21, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

read the talk page of Jamalludin Afghan, the Afghan proud!Abasin-اباسین 15:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Afghanistan
I know where wikipedia is for, but if you stupped Persia people are writing bullshit things, than are you the one who don't know where wikipedia is for!!! giving people the true information and not the propaganda of Persia!!! history less people —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abasin (talk • contribs) 02:10, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Blocked
I've blocked you from editing because I don't think you quite get what Wikipedia is for. Your edits to our encyclopedia are unconstructive, and others are having to clean up after you.

I'm going to leave you a welcome message here. Please please read the links. If you come back after the block and haven't read and heeded the links, the next block you get may well be permanent. For more information on this, see
 * Wikipedia's policies on vandalism
 * Policies on banned or discouraged content

If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so on Sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write   below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * Policy on neutral point of view
 * Guideline on external links
 * Guideline on conflict of interest

If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. '''Please bear in mind that any admin reviewing this block may or may not unblock or extend this block at their discretion. '''

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); — Kralizec! (talk) 02:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Badghis
You did delete sourced information (population). You used NPS as your source and deleted information that were provided by the government of Afghanistan. Here in wikipedia, we are trying to use the most reliable, comprehensive and upto-date sources that we can possibly find. Yes I have used AIMS and NPS as a reference in several places, and that is because those were the most reliable sources that I could find. I prefer to use MRRD, but they don't cover everything.

Now that you have added both estimates, there is no objection from my side. (Ketabtoon (talk) 05:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC))

Speedy deletion nomination of Bahrudeen Baes
A tag has been placed on Bahrudeen Baes requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Favonian (talk) 22:33, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Blocked
in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text  below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

reverted your unconstructive and un-explained edits
I have revereted your unconstructive edits from Laghman Province, Farah Province, Logar Province and Takhar Province. Please avoid deleting or rewording sourced information to match an ethnic POV. It is also a good idea to use the discussion section. (Ketabtoon (talk) 21:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC))

Those edits were done by a banned user. I even reverted some of them back to your edits like this one []. --Inuit18 (talk) 21:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This IP address was checked by an administrator on 26 July 2009 who said "Unrelated I determined that this was in fact a different user (who is not currently blocked)".


 * Please stop adding distorted percentages to wikipedia articles, adding Persian names to places where Persian is not spoken (as you did to Zabul province), and removing reliable verifiable sources. 119.152.247.228 (talk) 05:33, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

There is a Hazara minority in Zabul and Zabul is a Persian term. Zabulistan and Zabul were first mentioned by Ferdowsi in his Shahnameh.Most of my edits are backed by sources and I have only added estimates backed with reliable sources. Please present any distortions that I have done because I haven't vandalized any articles or distorted any edits.--Inuit18 (talk) 07:55, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * For Takhar Province the source clearly mentions that "The major ethnic groups in the province are Uzbeks and Tajiks followed by Pashtuns...". However, you changed it to "The major ethnic group in the province are Tajiks followed by Uzbeks Pashtuns and Hazara". The source is saying that there is an equal number of both Tajik and Uzbek but you changed it to make it look like the Tajiks are in more than Uzbeks when it is not clear if that is actually the case. You should provide reliable sources to back that claim. (Ketabtoon (talk) 14:52, 15 August 2009 (UTC))

Badghis Province
You said there are no Hazaras or Aimaks in Badghis. If you believe this to be true, then find a citation to a reliable verifiable source that indicates this. At the present time there is a source that is verifiable and that is considered reliable that says 56% are Persian speakers (Tajiks, Hazara, Aimaks). Changing the information in the article in contravention of the cited source is not appropriate. You also might take a look at Conflict in Afghanistan: a historical encyclopedia‎ page 103, by Frank Clements which says: One such group, the Kala Nai Hazaras, are Sunni Muslims who claim descent from the hordes of Genghis Khan; they settled in Kala Nau, now Badghis Province. There are other sources that also mention Hazaras in Badghis Province. --Bejnar (talk) 13:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

These sources clearly state that Ab kamari and Qalaye Naw are inhabited by Tajiks not Hazaras or Aimaks. 

Amu River
Please read Naming conventions (geographic names) before you make any changes to the Amu River article. I will quote it right here

"Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted and should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages, i.e., (Armenian name1, Belarusian name2, Czech name3). or (ar: name1, be: name2, cs: name3). As an exception to alphabetical order, the local official name should be listed before other alternate names if it differs from a widely accepted English name."  (Ketabtoon (talk) 20:36, 24 August 2009 (UTC))

Blocked
You have been blocked 72 hours for continued disruptive editing. You continue to make contentious edits without making any effort to provide reliable sources to back up your claims. In the future, I recommend you provide valid sources to justify any edit you make and I request that you discuss your edits beforehand on the article talk page. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

The same user who reported me is removing sourced information on other articles. Please check these and see who is really vandalizing ,.--Inuit18 (talk) 02:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see the articles' talk pages for Paktika and Nimruz; and stop removing sourced content and reliable verifiable sources (as you did in today's edits using 76.173.179.142). 119.152.246.94 (talk) 15:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Extended to 1 week for block evasion as IP 76.173.179.142. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 17:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

September 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Abdul Latif Pedram has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 12:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

thank you for informing me.--Inuit18 (talk) 17:49, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

September 2009
What was your reason for this revert, which undid 19 intermediate revisions? You didn't provide any edit summary at all to explain why you think an old version should be restored, and reverting numerous editors' contributions like this is considered edit warring. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 17:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

October 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ketabtoon (talk) 06:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Excuse me. I have only reverted the article on Muhammad of Ghor 2 times and that is today. The second time the article was vandalized by an IP address which was warned several times in the past and even banned from Wikipedia for vandalizing the same article. In both cases I have asked the IPs to participate in the discussion before removing a huge chunk of information from an article, especially replacing sourced material with non-sourced ones. Not to forget, you were doing the same thing as well and most likely that is what you were blocked for (disruptive editing and removing sourced material). Thank you (Ketabtoon (talk) 05:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC))

Possible unblock
Since blocking you I have been approached by another editor who informs me that the area you were constantly reverting is beset with problems by IP's and some others. I can understand your send of frustration at this and I am prepared to unblock you as long as you indicate by promise here that you will stick to a voluntary self monitored 1 revert position until the end of November this year. In such cases you may revert once and then if necessary you take your edit to the talk page first to attempt consensus or if necessary come to me or another admin to seek support because others are acting disruptively. I should add that if you were to go back to constant reverting your block would return and would most probably remain a permanent one. If you could consider this request and indicate your acceptance or otherwise I will see it tomorrow - or perhaps later tonight and consider my action at that time. With best wishes.-- VirtualSteve need admin support? 11:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for understanding the situation. I am willing to cooperate with you and I accept any temporary restrictions on my account. --Inuit18 (talk) 21:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Unblocked
As the original blocking administrator, I have unblocked your account, per your agreement here to stick to voluntary one reversion only guidelines until the end of November this year, as per our discussion at the previous post. Best wishes and happy editing.-- VirtualSteve need admin support? 23:38, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
-- VirtualSteve need admin support? 07:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Report on AIV
There is a report about you on the aiv you maybe interested in it .Happy Editing NotedGrant   Talk  07:26, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
NotedGrant  Talk  08:16, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 08:13, 18 October 2009 Alison (talk | contribs) blocked 119.73.0.236 (talk) (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 48 hours ‎ (Block evasion: Nisarkand, I know this is your IP. It's been on zillions of RFCU reports already) IP blocked by admin Alison-- NotedGrant  Talk  08:19, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

giving my e-mail to an IP
I give my e-mail to "119.152.246.214" and the so call NisarKand's IP is "119.73.0.244" (119.73.x.xxx). Both these IPs are from Pakistan, however the first one is from Islamabad, Pakistan while NisarKand's IP is from Peshawar, Pakistan. You have to do your research before jumping in to a conclusion. Next time you want to find out more about an IP, check "http://www.domaintools.com". Thank you  (Ketabtoon (talk) 06:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC))

IP´s can differ from eachother to 500 kms. One day you have the IP X and the otherday you have the IP Y. Between both there can be to 500km regional distance.--188.97.71.153 (talk) 22:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

ANI
See Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:45, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Vandal Edits
Unexplained deletions of content Unexplained deletions of referenced content Why? Intothefire (talk) 12:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Muhammad of Ghor
 * Ghōr Province
 * At various other places you have simply been removing the word Afghanistan and replacing with Khorasan or Iran without explanations

Those were obvious edits by Banned User:NisarKand and previously other users who have worked on this article have reached a consensus that Suri had nothing to do with the Suri Tribe.--Inuit18 (talk) 23:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Rumi
Hi can you keep an eye on Rumi. Thank you--Chetori5 (talk) 21:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Afghan (name)
Hi, although everyone is welcomed for constructive edits, but your edit in the Afghan (name) article was disruptive since it removed sourced content without explanation, among other unhelpful changes. You can add or change content of the article if it can be backed with reliable references, but you can't remove sourced content. Normally before removing cited material from an article, it is considered important and polite to include edit summary (see Help:Edit summary), as this helps others to understand the edit.  Massa Getae  (talk)  05:16, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

al-Farabi
Hello Inuit18. "there are no neutral images of Farabi" Can you explain? Is there a hint of ethnicity on the picture and how. Sole Soul (talk) 09:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

The image clearly depicts him as a Turk. Can't you recognize the slanted eyes and the flat nose?--Inuit18 (talk) 01:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Ahmad Shah Durrani
Please note that the birthplace of Ahmad Shah Durrani is still contested as there are reliable sources for both Herat and Multan. --Bejnar (talk) 02:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Jamaludin Afghani
Recognise the claims of some Pushtuns on Jamaludin Afghani and their POV´s concerned to his parent´s name (Zarghoon etc.)


 * I removed the massive unsourced quote pasted here, it was a clear copyright violation. Fences  &amp;  Windows  20:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

February 2010
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Ahmad Shah Durrani. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Fences &amp;  Windows  20:27, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Result of the 3RR case
See the result of WP:AN3. You seem to have knowledge of the sources, and you are expected to be able to negotiate with others. Do not continue to revert this article until consensus has been reached on Talk. Use the steps of WP:Dispute resolution if no agreement can be reached. Blocks are possible if editors continue to revert while the discussion is not yet finished. EdJohnston (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Your reverts at Afghanistan
A quick note regarding the edit war on Afghanistan.

I am not particularly enthusiastic about the reverts you made on the above page. When reverting another user it is customary to drop a quick notice on the talk page explaining why you did that, especially if you notice there is an ongoing edit war. You have left no explanation whatsoever on the talk page explaining your reverts, even though you reverted a total of three times on the article.

I am equally not fond of a third edit summary stating that another user violated 3RR; In my eyes that shows that you were fully aware that this was an ongoing edit war. Note that 3RR isn't a license to revert a user trice - it is merely a hard set limit. Knowing your in an edit war while not discussing it on the talk page can be considered to be disruptive. So please, use the talk page in the future rather then just reverting. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 19:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I have reported User:Ahmed shahi on the WP:ANI. In that discussion, he mentioned your name and accused you of POV pushing. I think you should be notified about this. Administrators'_noticeboard. Tajik (talk) 15:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

May 2010
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive edit warring including self-proclaimed edit wars. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Toddst1 (talk) 01:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * See, here's what you are not getting: the time frame is not really a point we want to argue with you. If you can't demonstrate clearly that you understand why we block people for edit warring then it is not in Wikipedia's best interest that you be unblocked. How about this: explain specifically what you would do if you were in a situation where you made some edits and another user reverted them. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia blocks people for edit warring when disagreements between two or numerous users start and a series of reverts and overrides occur without any discussion and consensus. Next time when I approach such a scenario I would use the talkpage to start a discussion with the user that I have disagreements with and until we do not reach a consensus and agreement I wouldn't revert or change the article. If this does not workout I would inform a neutral user or an admin to step in.--Inuit18 (talk) 03:50, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I will consider unblocking you if you agree to a 1RR restriction - that is at most one revert per day on any article, and indefinite blocking if you breach that agreement. Agreed? Toddst1 (talk) 20:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I accept your offer. Thank you--Inuit18 (talk) 01:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Please do not change.
Can you please do not change anyhting in Page "Saad Mohseni". Thanks --Yosuf (talk) 03:56, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked
Well, you've violated your 1RR on Ghōr Province. You are now blocked indefinitely and likely permanently.

To any admins reviewing this block, please do not unblock without consulting me first. Toddst1 (talk) 23:31, 31 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I was simply reverting vandalism on that article and I did not revert this article twice in one day. Please check my edits one more time. Thank you--Inuit18 (talk) 00:45, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I have requested a review of this block at ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 12:59, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Block Shortened
And as a result, I have shortened the block, expiring 24 hours from now. Note that your 1RR remains in effect. Any violation may result in immediate block with no warning.

In addition, you may be blocked for edit warring without notice for repeat reversions on an article that exceed the 24 hour threshhold. Toddst1 (talk) 14:54, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Abdul Hai Habibi
I see you have asked "Lagoo Sab" to discuss his edit before reverting your revert. Don't you think it would be a good idea if YOU use the discussion page first and explain why you disagree with his edits and what needs to be changed and what not? Because I don't see why you have reverted his edit in here. His edit in that article looks more constructive than your revert. Thank you (Ketabtoon (talk) 03:11, 4 October 2010 (UTC))

October 2010
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Toddst1 (talk) 03:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC) As I warned above in your unblocking, you may be "blocked for edit warring without notice for repeat reversions on an article that exceed the 24 hour threshhold." Toddst1 (talk) 03:29, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I do not know why Inuit18 was blocked and I leave it to the involved admins to decide. But just one note: his concerns regarding this is worth being checked by an admin. It seems that banned User:NisarKand is back with more sockpuppets. Tajik (talk) 15:23, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Just wanna leave a note that User:Inuit18 has been indef banned before under User:Anoshirawan, the same person was making the same repeated unblock requests    as he is trying to do now and was blaming things on User:NisarKand. Then someone using an IP came to User:Anoshirawan's talk page to defend him  and that person mentioned User:NisarKand by accusing him being racist and a nationalist. Similarly now User:Tajik came and tried to defend User:Inuit18 and mentioned User:NisarKand. I say there is a strong connection between User:Inuit18 (User:Anoshirawan) and User:Tajik, the accounts are possibly used as a proxy where someone in Germany logs to Wikipedia using an ISP of America or other countries. This proxy is useful only for small edits like how Inuit18 was editing because the net speed is very slow. I also suspect that User:Sommerkom is User:Tajik's sockpuppet since both edit the same isolated article Pata Khazana and both have the same identical views on Pata Khazana plus both are in the same location   and both are mostly active in the German Wikipedia  . User:Tajik is without a doubt under Sommerkom and Phoenix2 IDs in the German Wikipedia. He also has many blocks there  as he has many blocks here . I think it's about time that User:Tajik is blocked permanently because according to his long block history he has been given many chances to stop stirring trouble but he continues, and is a very heavy POV-pusher and very biased toward specific ethnic groups. I don't think Wikipedia (encyclopedia) should be a playground for such people to use it as a way to bash people.--Lagoo sab (talk) 15:59, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If you have sufficient evidence you should file an WP:SPI report. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge and WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 04:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)