User talk:Taddah

Hello, Taddah, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Dismas|^(talk) 02:30, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Cwmhiraeth. Taddah, thanks for creating Ahmad Beiranvand!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Some inline citations would be useful.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:35, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cwmhiraeth! Thank you so much. I'll try to fix that.Taddah (talk) 13:57, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User Taddah, your edits on page Lurs is an evident ethnocentric vandalism, please stop starting edit wars through bothersome and annoying edits. I recommend you to be a reasonable editor.SHADEGAN (talk) 19:16, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I won't undo your edit this time, since I don't want to start an edit war. But obviously, I'll ask an admin to do so.Taddah (talk) 21:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Lurs 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 BRD 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—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
I will have no other choice but to report you to administrators for edit warring if you keep going this way. Please stop.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:39, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wikaviani you better pay more attention before reverting someone's edit next time for not getting angry as you obviously are right now. I'll be glad if you report this dispute because it will settle our disagreement. you brought back some false, unsourced content. So, don't try to deny that you were wrong. Be careful, I'm not a little child. I don't care about your ridiculous threats as soon as you are wrong. I gave my reasons on the talk page but I received no convincing answer. So, I did what I had to do. Do something to resolve this dispute in which you have involved yourself or I'm going to revert your edit for the above mentioned reasons. Good luck! Taddah (talk) 14:47, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like the only one who is "angry" here, is you. I asked for page protection, only admins can edit it for now. Also, you better refrain from WP:BATTLEGROUND comments like the ones you wrote above. Trust me, if you resume edit-warring when the page protection expires, i'll find an admin to step in and deal with you. I mean it. Feel free to keep discussing on the article's talk page and try to achieve WP:CONSENSUS. Childish remarks of yours like "Be careful, I'm not a little child" (By the way, what do you mean by that ? trying to threaten me or something ? if so, don't waste your time. I'm not afraid of anyone, either here on Wiki or in my real life ...) or "I don't care about your ridiculous threats" are not playing in your favor. Also, if you'll "be glad if this case is reported", then go ahead, report it to the relevant noticeboard and see what will happen. As i said, you're warned (just like Shadegan) for edit warring and if you keep going this way, i'll report both of you. Enjoy your week-end. Regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:27, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wikaviani I'll tell you why I got a little angry. I saw your message on my talk page, but when I checked Shadegan's talk page, I didn't see such a thing. Therefore, I thought that this is not acceptable because he too is one side of this dispute. But, then I realized that you have sent him a message too. The reason why I didn't notice it was that you had not created a new section for it. Anyways, I left a message for the admin who protected the page. I hope he does what I asked him to do to resolve this disagreement. As for you and I, I think we aren't really talking to each other nicely. I guess we can be friends. Such remarks are not desirable. By the way, I don't know where you live, but in my country it is actually the first day of the week, but I wish you a nice weekend. Taddah (talk) 18:24, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Taddah: No worries, posting a warning on your sole talk page would clearly not have been fair, this is why i warned him too. As to your question, i'm an Iranian citizen living in france, therefore it's also the first day of the week-end for me, and yes, i guess we can be friend as long as you and me try to contribute in a positive way to this encyclopedia. Cheers.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:28, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect The Eternal Jew (1934 film). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 9#The Eternal Jew (1934 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Thank you very much. Taddah (talk) 10:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Taddah, I saw your edit at Wildlife of Benin and noted your user page, where you had written "To make it blue :)", and I wanted to share an idea. Making it blue is not always good. Take a look at Wikipedia's guidance at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking, and especially WP:SEAOFBLUE on the same page. The basic idea is that we should generally only link things that are likely to be useful to the reader, so common things need not be linked.

I hope that helps and please let me know if you have any questions, SchreiberBike | ⌨  12:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SchreiberBike. First of all, I'm glad to talk to you again, and thank you so much for your concern. Feel free to revert my edits if there is anything wrong with them to protect Wikipedia and to teach me how I should edit pages from now on. I know that making it blue is not always good, and I also know that it's generally not good to link to common words. Although, I think rules can never be absolute, and defining which words are common is not always easy. I agree that words such as film or maybe wildlife might seem common to everyone, but if you are talking about words like flora and fauna that I made blue :) I think they can't necessarily be considered common. As you know, many if not most people who read English pages of Wikipedia are not native speakers of Enlgish (like myself). I think you are a native speaker of English, am I right? Maybe fauna seems common to you, but to me it's actually not. I must say that before reading pages of wildlife of different countries on Wiki, I had no idea what flora and fauna mean. Plus, I've seen such words having links on many other similar articles like this and this. Anyways, I don't mean to defend my own actions by these words. This is just waht I think, and I'm waiting for your answer. Thank you very much for giving me those links. I will read them, and I will do it probably tomorrow cause I'm a little tired now. Also, you had better mentioned what parts of my edits were wrong or had reverted them, and explained it on edit summary. Best Regards. Taddah (talk) 19:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response Taddah. I didn't revert your edits because they were not very wrong and they were obviously made with good intent. However, when I saw "To make it blue :)" on your user page, I thought it might be a good idea to point out WP:SEAOFBLUE in case you were not familiar with that. The only word you linked which I thought was unnecessary was "forest reserve", as I thought that was commonly known, but I may be wrong. You are right that I should keep the needs of non-native English speakers in mind. My best to you. SchreiberBike | ⌨  11:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]