User talk:Hassangholishabestari

June 2022

Hello, I'm PigeonChickenFish. An edit that you recently made to Vahid Tarokh seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! PigeonChickenFish (talk) 03:58, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are IEEE web-pages, Government of Canada webpages, webpages of Universities etc. not acceptable citations?

This is very strange!!! Hassangholishabestari (talk) 17:59, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hassangholishabestari: These are not considered reliable sources since many of them are either self-published or primary sources, see WP:RS. This article has a history of conflict of interest edits, so the addition of self published sources is suspicious. Are you at all connected to Vahid Tarokh? PigeonChickenFish (talk) 18:09, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Technology Review Magazine is not a primary source? Press release of Universities are not primary source? Government of Canada is not a primary source?

Also I am not related to him except that we are both Iranians.

Do revert whatever you want, but it seems that you may have a conflict of interest here Hassangholishabestari (talk) 18:26, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please read through the link, a press release is a non reliable source. Context matters in how you apply citations, everything is explained in the link. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 18:40, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. You asked for the citations to be improved. I thought these were legitimate citations so I added them. If it is not acceptable, please revert Hassangholishabestari (talk) 18:44, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BTW: I looked at the citations you added and I frankly do not see any differences. You added Harvard Magazine and I added Harvard Gazette. My source was webpage of universities (which seems to be acceptable), webpages of IEEE, etc. Do not understand why your citations are acceptable?

Anyways, revert as you wish but it seems that you have a conflict of interest here or simply think your work is better than others. Hassangholishabestari (talk) 18:49, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to be helpful since your a new editor here and there are some errors made, I showed you the information re: context of use of citations within WP:RS. Please refrain from attacking me here, this is not a civil way of interacting with people. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 21:01, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was not attacking you. I read the rules and most of the references I added (if not all) are acceptable according to these rules.

When you revert things, you are saying all of them are unacceptable. If you want to be constructive, let us go trough both my references and yours and see which one violates the rules. Hassangholishabestari (talk) 10:48, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hassangholishabestari: You did attack me with language like, "simply think your work is better than others" and/or accusing me of a conflict of interest instead of asking me nicely. I gave you the information and instead of talking it out you choose edit warring. Best of luck to you here.PigeonChickenFish (talk) 22:31, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I am very sorry if you felt that way. All I am saying is that most of many references that I added match the criteria you sent me.

If you disagree, point out to the ones that do not qualify and I myself will delete them. Thanks and all the best wishes Hassangholishabestari (talk) 01:15, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Vahid Tarokh. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 04:52, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 17:19, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Hassangholishabestari! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! PigeonChickenFish (talk) 03:58, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]