User talk:Peterjmikhail

Welcome!

 * }

Wikipedia:User:Marco Safwat
Did you misplace a report or request for assistance? Wikipedia:User:Marco Safwat appears to be misplaced and will likely be speedily deleted. Does it need moved somewhere else? —C.Fred (talk) 14:11, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * sorry, there is just no place to do that kind of report, and you are WP:INVOLVED.   Ebe 123   → report ← Contribs 14:28, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, if the text is blatantly promotional, a report might be in order. However, that situation needs spelled out clearly in edit summaries, talk page comments, or noticeboard comments (if all else fails, the administrators' noticeboard for incidents). —[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred (talk) 14:55, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That was what I suggested to him.   Ebe 123   → report ← Contribs 15:28, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Please stop the edit warring and discuss the situation
Your recent editing history at Qnet ltd shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. 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. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block. If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. —C.Fred (talk) 14:14, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring
Hi,

Regarding your question on my talk page about another editor, you will see by his talk page that User talk:Marco Safwat has also been warned about edit warring, just as you have. He has already been blocked once. You will be both be blocked again if you continue.

Please take a step back and read the information in the "Welcome" template above, especially Three-revert rule, Building consensus and Resolving disputes.

Wiki is about working together with others. Edit warring etc. will only end up with you being blocked from editing, even if you are "right". Discuss disagreements on the article talk page before editing further, and try to reach some consensus.

Please contact the admins who are doing the blocking, User talk:C.Fred and User talk:Materialscientist (who temporarily blocked Marco Safwat) for advice if the other editor continues to add to the article. If the Three-revert rule is broken, you can report it to the admins above or the 3RR noticeboard.

Meanwhile, why don't you edit some other articles, so that you can enjoy editing without getting upset?

Hope this helps. KennethSides (talk) 15:03, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * FYI, Marco Safwat did break 3RR this afternoon (UTC), and I did block him for 72 hours. —C.Fred (talk) 16:08, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:08, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

An article you created is under discussion at the NPOV noticeboard
Greetings! This message is to advise you that an article you created or contributed heavily to is under discussion about whether the article presents its subject from a neutral point of view. The discussion is at Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. —C.Fred (talk) 15:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

please stop and discuss your changes to Qnet I just spent over twos verifying sources and address WP:POV issues. Gnangarra 15:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Qnet ltd shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. 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. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Gnangarra 15:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

You have now reverted the article 3 times please revert you edits. Gnangarra 15:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:00, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Qnet for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Qnet is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Qnet until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Systumm (talk) 02:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC)