User talk:WKTU

Administrator Notification Notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
 * Do NOT delete this notice, please!
 * Alek2407 (talk) 18:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

It was moved to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Content_noticeboard#User_.27WKTU.27_and_.27Islam.27_article. here] Alek2407 (talk) 01:04, 7 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Why are you deleting all the messages from your talk page ?--WKTU (talk) 06:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Edits on 'Islam'
Hello i have reverted your addition to Islam regarding the percentage of denominations. I have done so for these reasons.
 * - At least 3 editors disagree with you
 * - If you want to make a bold statement like this you need several/stronger sources
 * - The current wording is less aggressive/controversial.
 * - You have been asked to stop editing until we can have a civil discussion on the talk page
 * -We do not even have a discussion about this. For controversial statements like yours you do need consensus to edit.
 * -Lastly I, and others, doubt your good faith and neutrality.

Please respond to this on the talk page. Any further editing of yours on this article will result in us notifying higher powers. Goodbye!


 * Alek2407 (talk) 06:23, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Please do not delete warnings from your talk page until they become irrelevant; New users may not realize that these warnings are still available in your history so it is pointless to do so!
 * Alek2407 (talk) 18:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Why are you deleting all the messages from your talk page ?--WKTU (talk) 06:23, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

5th June 2010
I noticed your anti-social editing on this page lately and you fail to assume  good faith. Estimates are different to give a neutral viewpoint. I noticed you are new here and might be unfamiliar so i reccomend you read Policies and guidelines. It is also against wikipedia rules to edit controversial stats without a consensus. Your figures giving a 90% Sunni rate under 'Denominations' seem biased and such edits have been considered controversial in the past. Discus edits on this talk page before major revisions next time. Thanks and regards. Iwanttoeditthissh (talk) 21:55, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * My first edits were in 2009, but you began editing last month only so you are new one. My edits are fine, it is you who is removing properly sourced figures and that is vandalism.--WKTU (talk) 03:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Your editing
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Sunni Islam has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary on the talk page, especially if it's a controversial edit. You may wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Also, bear in mind that changing verifiable and reliable sources for your own viewpoint is against wikipedia policy. Thank you. Iwanttoeditthissh (talk) 22:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Your revert is vandalism.--WKTU (talk) 03:35, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

6th June 2010
Please do not delete sourced material from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Islam as your own personal analysis is against wikipedia policy. Your recent edits can be considered as vandalism as you have engaged in Edit warring which will not be tolerated. Although vandalizing articles on occasions that are days or weeks apart from each other sometimes prevents editors from being blocked, your continued vandalism constitutes a long term pattern of abuse and you may risk losing your account withut further notice. The informatin you have added is already present under ths section of the article and your edits are hampering efforts to get featured status for the page. Iwanttoeditthissh (talk) 09:55, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

As a further note, have you considered Adopt-a-User? It's a program designed to help new and inexperienced Wikipedia users which may aid you in understanding wikipedia policies better. Iwanttoeditthissh (talk) 10:21, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Islam
I don't believe you are in full possession of the facts, and even if you believe you are you need to discuss on a talk page without engaging in an edit war, which can lead to even those who speak the "Truth" being silenced by a block. This edit, for instance, is illogical - per Islamic schools and branches which clearly disproves your assertion. Please take my advise and drop the stick before you end up getting blocked. Discuss. S.G.(GH) ping! 21:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, instead of threatening me you should help out the problem. See Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard--WKTU (talk) 13:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Re:Possible banned editor evading, disrupting and edit-warring
Hi WKTU. I looked over the edits and I agree that they are very similar. I recommend you file a sockpuppet investigation at WP:SPI. In the report, be sure to detail exactly what you just told me. If you need any help or assistance doing that, please feel free to let me know. -  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 04:09, 9 June 2010 (UTC)