User talk:Alhitmi123

Welcome!

Hello, Alhitmi123, 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! I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message (talk to me) (My edits) @ 16:00, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Alhitmi123, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Al Bin Ali have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:40, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Abu Tahir al-Jannabi, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 20:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that Abu Tahr was Persian, he was born in Bahrain, he spoke Arabic all his life and didn’t speak Farsi. In fact he even ranked Persians as a second class in Qarmatia. Even the city their family name is named after which is Jannaba is southern Persia was mainly Arab ethnically. Alhitmi123 (talk) 20:20, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The two WP:RS that you removed says otherwise. Your claims are also unsourced. HistoryofIran (talk) 20:59, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you are correct, It didn’t make sense at first an original arab would do a genocide against defenseless civilians, his honor wouldn’t allow it. Thanks for clarifying 🙏. Alhitmi123 (talk) 22:00, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More unsourced claims. Please read WP:RS when you have time, thanks. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why it says WP:RS, do you have the name of the book or the full source? Thanks Alhitmi123 (talk) 22:18, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why it says WP:RS

This is why you should read WP:RS.

do you have the name of the book or the full source?

This shows you have not even bothered to check the citations. You just merely removed them because you disagreed with them. I am outta here. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:26, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked them and they don’t state that they were of a Persian origin, infact iranicaonline.org the website you cited clearly states in the first paragraph that his origin is uncertain. It seems that you want him to be Persian so hard for some reason or the other. Alhitmi123 (talk) 23:09, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"A native of Jannābā on the coast of Fārs and of Persian origin, whether he himself claimed royal Persian descent or the claim was put forward later on his behalf is uncertain." - Iranica The royal origin is uncertain, not the Persian origin itself.

Not to mention you are being hypocritical, you removed "Persian" because it was "unsourced", yet you added the unsourced "Arab". Attack me or remove sourced information again and you will be reported. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:15, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Report me if you like, your source is not peer-reviewed, if you are a person of knowledge you would care about learning and not pushing an agenda. The source you mentioned clearly says that his origin is uncertain and the source is not peer-reviewed and doesn’t have any citation of any historian claiming he was of a Persian origin. Jannaba is home to many ethnicities including Persian. There is no evidence they spoke Persian nor been to Persia nor said they were. Alhitmi123 (talk) 01:22, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 01:56, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - LouisAragon (talk) 03:04, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t understand, he is quoting the source wrong. And the source is not peer-reviewed. His source says something different than what it’s written. The source says uncertain! Alhitmi123 (talk) 04:04, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:41, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 13:26, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Abu Tahir al-Jannabi. Mann Mann (talk) 12:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With all my heart, i advise you to walk outside and make some friends 🙏. Alhitmi123 (talk) 15:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Make a personal comment about another editor again, and your block will be extended. Wikipedia:Civility is one of Wikipedia's five pillars. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I advise you also to take a walk outside and make some friends, it’s healthy 🌹. Alhitmi123 (talk) 18:02, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do that every day, thank you. And, you were given fair warning. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. 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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If multiple editors are reverting your changes, then you need to stop making the changes. See WP:BRD and follow it. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me exactly why? Because the sources they keep on reverting are wrong and is not related to the written sentence. I asked them multiple times to double check. Couple of persian nationalists who spends the largest chunk of their lives editing unsourced narratives that gives them the satisfaction of a false fantasy victory teamed up and trying to pass their narrative. I tried my best to just simply ask for sources which was not provided until now. And you blocked me for asking for legitimate sources? Yah this website is definitely a personal blog that favors people who knows it tricks. Alhitmi123 (talk) 15:10, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My concern isn't about your dispute (on which I have no opinion), but about the stabiity of Wikipedia. You have caused instability by edit warring rather than discussing on the talk page, therefore you are blocked. That is the normal process. It is that simple. If you resume this disruptive activity after your block expires, you will be re-blocked for a longer duration, up to indefinitely. Again, see WP:BRD and adhere to it as a best practice. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now i did open a discussion. The sources used is not even about the same topic as the written claim… do you even care if what’s written is correct at this point? Is there even a point of me wasting my effort? Alhitmi123 (talk) 13:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I take an administrative action in an article, I cannot be involved in its content, so I have no opinion to give you about correctness. You are in a content dispute, you must work to resolve it by consensus building, not by edit-warring. My job as administrator is to preserve the stability of the Wikipedia project. To that end, I have some tools available, which include blocking accounts and protecting articles from being edited. Go to the article talk page and convince others of your position. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried, but they ignored my comments. If you see all of my edits were followed by comments explaining why exactly i made these edits. regardless the comments were ignored and they kept on reverting. Alhitmi123 (talk) 14:55, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More dishonesty... honestly I should just report you to WP:ANI again. You were lucky you didn't get indeffed - 4 users supported it [1]. HistoryofIran (talk) 15:30, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dishonesty? And you allow this type of behavior and language towards me? What 4 users? Your other accounts? Honestly i was one of the few professors that kind of supported Wikipedia and was wondering why it is attacked heavily in the academic community. Now i understand that it’s just a blog that favors whoever figures the tricks and games of the system so they can pass their agenda and get daydreaming wins. Alhitmi123 (talk) 15:52, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are certainly acting like a professor. HistoryofIran (talk) 16:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

“If a thousand scholars debated with me, I would overcome them, but if one ignorant person debated with me, he would overcome me.” Ali Ibn Abi Taleb. Alhitmi123 (talk) 16:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So you do care about this “project.” Go on block historyofiran for insulting me, calling me dishonest, sarcastically making fun of my profession, and other things. Show us u actually care about this. Or will u make up reasons on how they didn't break the rules 😂? Alhitmi123 (talk) 16:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even Anachronist said you werent ignored, so yes, thats called dishonesty. And constantly insulting me and removing sourced info is indeed not professor-like. @Anachronist: First calling me a sock, and now calling me ignorant. Thats two attacks after you warned them. HistoryofIran (talk) 16:52, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe HistoryofIran's behavior crosses the Wikipedia:Civility line to warrant a block, then make a report at WP:ANI to get assessment from multiple editors and administrators. That is what HistoryofIran did; he made a report (two, actually) and didn't petition a single administrator to block you, as you just petitioned me.

Both of you need to settle down. You both know the rules by now. In this case, they boil down to these:

In any dispute, comment on the content, not the contributor (policies: WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL)
Follow WP:BRD as a best practice, gain WP:Consensus on the talk page
Take advantage of the WP:Dispute resolution options available

If those things had been done to begin with, nobody would have been blocked. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh now i should report their attitude? didn't you threaten me with this quote "Make a personal comment about another editor again, and your block will be extended. Wikipedia:Civility is one of Wikipedia's five pillars." But when it comes to HistoryOfIran you went soft and asked me to report him. This project used to be a beautiful place filled with editors who care about spreading knowledge and information. Now it is controlled by few hyper-active kids who wants to pass whatever they feel about and do anything they want. No wonder whenever you mention Wikipedia, the first thing that comes to everyone's mind that it is not a reliable source. It all makes sense, enjoy editing your daily opinionated blogs. Alhitmi123 (talk) 08:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh now i should report their attitude? didn't you threaten me with this quote "Make a personal comment about another editor again, and your block will be extended. Wikipedia:Civility is one of Wikipedia's five pillars." But when it comes to HistoryOfIran you went soft and asked me to report him.

I still didn't attack you. And did you forget the part where you just called me ignorant [2] and using 4 other accounts, i.e. socking? [3] That + the ANI report, you should be content that you are not indeffed yet.

This project used to be a beautiful place filled with editors who care about spreading knowledge and information. Now it is controlled by few hyper-active kids who wants to pass whatever they feel about and do anything they want. No wonder whenever you mention Wikipedia, the first thing that comes to everyone's mind that it is not a reliable source. It all makes sense, enjoy editing your daily opinionated blogs.

Hmm.. let's see what we have here

Misusing citations at Sumer, which was exposed by another user [4] [5] [6]

Unsourced claims, taking a dig at Persians: I guess you are correct, It didn’t make sense at first an original arab would do a genocide against defenseless civilians, his honor wouldn’t allow it. Thanks for clarifying 🙏.

Plagiarism, made the formatting worse, used the wrong source [7]

Engaged in WP:SYNTH, where you didn't even add a page [8]

Want me to continue? HistoryofIran (talk) 12:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Observations

I could be wrong, but in looking over your edits and the reverts, it seems to me that the problem was that you removed citations to reliable sources instead of improving the content using the same sources. If you think a source is unreliable, the place to discuss it is at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard.

I'll add that it's commendable you tried to discuss things on talk pages; you weren't ignored, but you also didn't really engage when others disagreed with you, instead you kept trying to change the article instead of coming to an agreement.

When you are in a dispute with one other editor, you may request a third opinion at Wikipedia:Third opinion. If you are in a dispute with multiple editors, you can open a request for comment; see WP:RFC. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:02, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]