User talk:Rahibsaleem

July 2015

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of more than one account or IP address by one person. If this was not your intention, then please always remember to log in when editing. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:43, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Quranism shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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 your 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. NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain

Why you copied another editor's warning to you to another user's talk page. [1] --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:47, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to User:Vaultloopb, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 15:29, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Quranism. NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:06, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Newt Gingrich, you may be blocked from editing. Materialscientist (talk) 05:18, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 05:20, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Materialscientist:: Please see Williammacewen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), new account two days after the day of this ban, and making same edits as banned user. - Cwobeel (talk) 00:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for merging of Template:Quranism

Template:Quranism has been nominated for merging with Template:Quran. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 08:57, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cadet College Rawalpindi

The article Cadet College Rawalpindi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks significant coverage. Doesn't meets WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BookishReader (talk) 11:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]