User talk:SharabSalam

Welcome!

Hello, شرعب السلام, 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:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Mstrojny (talk) 00:28, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi شرعب السلام! You created a thread called Mention using the signature name at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi شرعب السلام! You created a thread called Https and Http at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, have you given any consideration to this message? Also, if you would like to archive your talk page posts as opposed to deleting them, please see this link for assistance with archiving. Have a nice day - wolf 02:00, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Thewolfchild: Yes, I replied here. Thank you again for your help. --SharabSalam (talk) 08:15, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Houthi parliament election

Hi

Should we create an article about the election organized in 2019 in Yemen? --Panam2014 (talk) 21:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: I guess we should. I will help to improve it if it was created.--SharabSalam (talk) 23:18, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We have the artice Next Yemeni parliamentary election. --Panam2014 (talk) 23:21, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014:Well... I have no idea. You can ask experienced editors on this matter.--SharabSalam (talk) 23:38, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have sources about date, number of seats, etc ? --Panam2014 (talk) 23:41, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: the date is in April and I couldn't find how many seats are available but they said they will do two elections first for those who died and second for those who allied with the Hadi-government based on these sources [1]

[2] and I think it's still early to create an article about the elections. There isn't much available details about it --SharabSalam (talk) 00:02, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

You have reverted, multiple times, my edits in article February 2019 Warsaw Conference, which all had reliable sources. Your work is an absolute violation of wikipedia regulations. I warn should you continue with this I shall have to report you to the administrators.Alex-h (talk) 14:57, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex-h:What?Where and when? provide diffs--SharabSalam (talk) 15:10, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex-h:I just took a look at the article and I have not reverted anything I deleted the meeting section because its already covered in the press con... and the other section because it was obv irrelevent to the article that wasnt even a revert that was improving the article and not multiple times as you implied. You can warn me if you want but read this first Wikipedia:Don't shoot yourself in the foot --SharabSalam (talk) 15:19, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have reverted, multiple times, my edits 1 and 2, which all had reliable sources. Alex-h (talk) 06:59, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex-h: And I have explained why I did that!! Even if it's sourced (although by biased sources) You add new sections for things that aren't reported in the media that much to be notable and tbh I didn't even know you before you sent me a message. I was trying to fix the article and now your informations are included in the article happy?--SharabSalam (talk) 07:14, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex-h: And to be honest in the first diff you provided, I wasn't actually willing to delete the political gathering section that happened by an accident because you added that section just after I opened the editor and when I saved my edits (which was only deleting the meeting section because it's already mentioned in another section) the editor saved the version that I edited on and automatically deleted the section of "political gathering"--SharabSalam (talk) 07:23, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know and I’m sure these things may happen naturally. As a matter of fact, the gathering in Warsaw was very important to me and I see it directly related to the summit. Anyway, I see you too were interested in the events in Warsaw, maybe we have something in common and can continue. Alex-h (talk) 14:01, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly-SharabSalam (talk) 16:16, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanction alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33 Wikiemirati (talk) 07:33, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your attention needed at WP:CHU

Hello. A renamer or clerk has responded to your username change request, but requires clarification before moving forward. Please follow up at your username change request entry as soon as possible. Thank you. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 20:37, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Slavery, 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. Acroterion (talk) 17:01, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your personal dislike of the idea that Arabs were involved, along with Europeans and Africans, is not grounds for removal of content. The burden is on you to find consensus for removal. Acroterion (talk) 17:03, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see now that the image in question was a recent edit that other editors have disputed. I've reverted to the article state that preceded that addition. The burden should have been on that editor to justify the addition. Acroterion (talk) 17:27, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiemirati

Hello SharabSalam. I saw you also had probelms with Wikiemirati recently, and I too was also prey to this user aggresssive, vengeful like behavior such as engaging in WP:HOUNDING and edit-warring by him. Is it possible by any chance that you can give me some more information on this user and other instances where he has exhibited this behavior? Thank You.Mountain157 (talk) 20:18, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Warring warning

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 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.

March 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at Abolitionism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:23, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

SharabSalam (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand what is the 3RR and what an edit war mean but that editor has reverted me three times and I have reported him yet I got no respose whatsoever I didnt know anything else to do except that I revert one more time and as you can see here that I lost Special:MobileDiff/886321647 from the edit summary that I lost control. the other editor has been edit warring and making distruptive edits even after I reported him. I am busy these days and I wasnt so much interest in editing wikipedia but after I saw how he is pushing POVs and how my reports are useless I really got out of control. I dont really know if this reason is enough for unblock but as I said I understand what is an editwar I have been blocked once because of it and I dont think I did the right thing but I am a human and I dont have much patience for this POV pushing but I know my mistake and I am in no way going to edit in any article related to that matter(slavery) I dont care about it anymore. I have other articles that I want to improve and plans to do in other articles and this ban is just pointless and looks more like a punishment since(again) I am not going to make any edit in there(articles that are related to slavery) at least for the next 6 months. . ThanksSharabSalam (talk) 16:47, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

See below — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:46, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this was your first block for edit warring then I would be much more sympathetic to the request above. I accept that everyone makes mistakes but how can we know that the same mistake will not keep happening? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:47, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MSGJ I have gave my word that I will no longer edit in the articles that are related to slavery at least for the next six months. I am not really interested in these articles I am more interested in Yemen-related articles and I have done a lot of contributions in that area but that editor behaviour was provocative and as I said I couldn't hold myself.--SharabSalam (talk) 20:58, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got another chance. But it's not just slavery articles you need to be careful with - last time you were edit warring on Saudi Arabia. Stop after the first or second revert and go to the talk page — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:48, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]