User talk:Mikey2maaaa

November 2019
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Mena Massoud, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 08:39, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Also note your edit also added false information in that your statement "Massoud stated that his family's Christian faith in the Islamically dominated Egypt pressured them to immigrate to Canada" was never said by him per the reference used. What was there before your edit accurately reflects what he actually said in the interview plus other stuff that you deleted when adding that misstatement. You have now added this false information and deleted valid information six times. Geraldo Perez (talk) 09:11, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I was the first person on here to write about Massoud's explanation for his immigration months ago, giving contextual detail about the plight of Copts in Egypt, then you came and changed it, getting rid of this key detail. Please stop this.
 * He didn't mention any of that in his statement. Stick to what he actually said and don't add your interpretation of what you think he meant. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:51, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Mena Massoud, you may be blocked from editing. As before Geraldo Perez (talk) 07:57, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Mena Massoud. As before Geraldo Perez (talk) 07:59, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

I am sticking to what Massoud said. He very clearly said "We're Coptic Christians. And my parents felt like things were getting a little too dangerous''. Anyone with even a minimal understanding of contemporary Egyptian society, like myself (a Middle Eastern Christian like Massoud), would know that he's referring to the notorious historical and ongoing persecution of Copts in Egypt, a persecution that has forced many Copts like Massoud to emigrate. Please stop being ignorant and tone death.
 * Anything you added beyond what he explicitly stated is strictly your interpretation. Others editors, not me, originally removed the content that went beyond his statement, what is there is a compromise to get the information out in a way that neutrally reflects what happened without characterizing it in any way. His article is not a WP:COATRACK to push your personal issues. The article is about Massoud, not about the plight of Coptics in Egypt. What he explicitly stated is sufficient to explain why is family emigrated from Egypt and does touch on the issues without excessive emphasis. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:51, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Mena Massoud. 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 their 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 result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:35, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Mena Massoud emigration in article
To give some more history of the article, there were editors, possibly Egyptian, who wished to completely remove the information about his emigration reasons completely from the article, likely because they thought it reflected poorly on Egyptian culture and society. I objected and basically restored what they removed, your original edits likely. As a neutral compromise in order to cover the issue without overemphasizing it, the current version of using his exact words in an interview, without any interpretation of what he meant, seemed to keep the people who wanted to remove the info completely satisfied while also keeping the information in the article. Your edits to restore the original contentious wording goes against that compromise and may raise the ire of certain Egyptian based editors who watch the article. What you want is for the information about why his family was motivated to move is still there. What you are pushing by including your interpretations of what he meant, but didn't state, is no longer a neutral statement of fact and really adds nothing of value to an article that is meant to be about a person, not about a somewhat tangental issue about his childhood. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:29, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * As a compromise I linked Copts in Egypt to the quote where he mentions why he left Egypt. That article seems more appropriate and neutral, but still covers the issue you find important. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:32, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I added a link that covered your issues. Why is that not sufficient? Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:41, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

The Persecution of Copts is an important article that is central and relevant to Massoud's life. The fact that you continuously attempt to omit it so that to appease individuals who may take offence at its inclusion is quite frankly both pathetic and symptomatic of the exceptionally dangerous notion that the truth should be suppressed to placate groups or individuals who take issue with its exposure, usually because it reveals an unpleasant reality that they're responsible for. I genuinely believe you should do some self-reflection to think about the principle and consequence behind your actions. I will continue to include the article no matter how many times you attempt to discard it simply because it is the truth, and that is all that is needed.
 * The link I added, Copts in Egypt, includes that information fairly prominently along with a lot of other in context information about his heritage. Why is that not sufficient to meet your needs? Adding an non-neutral point of view Easter egg link on a phrase that repeats a lot of the same things is unnecessary. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:58, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Mena Massoud
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Mena Massoud. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Edit Warring on Christianity
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jtrevor99 (talk) 15:31, 19 December 2019 (UTC)