Hi Xpërt100! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! -- Toddy1 (talk) 10:27, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
What are you trying to achieve with the </nowiki> that you entered into the article on Umar?
As you can see, they both look the same. (1) lacks this feature, (2) has it.
-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:27, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Kriti Kharbanda, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Ab207 ( talk) 14:17, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Per MOS:FONTSIZE, please do not use small font in infoboxes, navboxes or similar items that already use a reduced font. Thanks. DrKay ( talk) 18:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Ok, Thanks @DrKay! After removing "< small >...< /small >" this, then can I use "{{ small|"... please tell me! Thank Xpërt100 ( talk) 18:46, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Both of you! Should I revert those articles, which I did? Xpërt100 ( talk) 20:08, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
You were asked not to put small font in infoboxes, navboxes or similar items that already use a reduced font. But you have just done it again in this edit to Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr. -- Toddy1 (talk) 19:30, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
<small>...</small>
with replace with {{
small}}
. It's my mistake.. I am not read it properly, surely I shall improved that I have done mistake before! I Apologize for it! Thanks for telling me @Toddy1
Xpërt100 (
talk) 22:06, 19 September 2021 (UTC)Hello. You've nominated a few articles for speedy deletion today, with a deletion rationale of "Full article based on one reference". That's not a valid reason to speedy delete an article. Please review WP:CSD carefully before nominating any more articles for speedy deletion. Thanks. 2A01:4C8:A6:738:4FF:82E7:7FA3:C70A ( talk) 11:14, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Oh! Thanks @2A01:4C8:A6:738:4FF:82E7:7FA3:C70A Xpërt100 ( talk) 11:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Having just put 10 hours into extensive but universally minor redactions of the article Muspilli, essentially all of which were concerned merely with citation formatting, and most of which are invisible to casual examination, I was shocked and appalled to see your un-do of them all.
I cannot assume anything good from your use of the word "vandalism", and am frankly offended by it. It was either a reactionary remark, or a snide comment, or impatience at the possibility of reviewing extensive changes.
On the hopes that you might come to your senses given time to think. I've restored the changed text. If you have some objection to that change, please let me know on my talk page, and I will try my best to fix whatever you think is broken. Quite frankly, this was a 1 hour fixup that got way out of hand; lacking a call from you to fix up any mess I've made, I won't be looking back. If you redo the undo, I won't reverse it again, but rather take it as a sign that you are incorrigible, and that my time is better spent elsewhere.
The flaw in the article in its prior form is that the citations were only in text, and not linked to the citations in the bibliography. The flaw (still) with the citations in the bibliography is that they are not in template format. In that form, they cannot be used for any kind of linked reference, including Harvard-style references and HTML "<ref>...</ref>" style. Since the embedded citations (some of them poorly done, since only parenthetic page numbers were used, without author and year) were done in what was approximately "<ref>...</ref>" style, that's what I turned them into.
The citations in the article are sub-standard. They need to be fixed. If you think it's appropriate to erase the fixes that I made, then go and do it your way. Leaving the references as they stood is not okay.
You might be alarmed that I deleted the parenthetic years embedded along with the authors' names in the text (e.g. "Smith (1892)" became "Smith[ref#]"), but since that information is already present in the linked to citation, contained in the superscript number, I thought about it and decided that it was unnecessary excess information. The date is in the linked reference.
In order to be conservative, I left the bibliography as-is, in place. Technically, the duplicates references should be weeded out, but I have no great motivation ever to get to that, and planned on leaving it for someone else
If you don't want me to do it, then you could consider taking on the job of
Astro-Tom-ical ( talk) 17:57, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled " Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Edit summary content is visible in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 ( talk) 18:13, 15 September 2021 (UTC) Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 ( talk) 18:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Ok, Thanks! @Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 Xpërt100 ( talk) 18:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 19:22, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Saad al Ghamdi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macca. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 06:03, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
You need to find primary sources describing this publisher. Mission statements and claims about fact checking need secondary sources discussing them. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 18:24, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sahih al-Bukhari, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eid.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello Xpërt100! Your additions to King Faisal Prize in Service to Islam 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.
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. DanCherek ( talk) 14:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. ~
TNT (she/they •
talk) 19:58, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Xpërt100 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
If you read " WP:BP" then you will realize that the main purpose of block of an user or ip address to prevent vandalism (Wikipedia articles). But, if you looks at the contributions I've made over the last month, to make the Wikipedia article better and protect it from vandalism (attackers)...then you'll be realize, I am not that type of person you are finding about.. I am not here to vandalism Wikipedia; I am here to make Wikipedia a good knowledge source. Now, if you think I should be blocked then you also break the rule of blocking policies; it would not to be considered the real blocking policies, it would be WP:BLOCKNOTPUNITIVE. Now it's your choice! I have nothing more to say. I really enjoyed to working here, Wikipedia just a feeling! Thanks!! --- Xpërt100 ( talk) 20:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This does not address your violations of WP:SOCK and WP:EVADE. Additionally, your original account was so abusive, it has been globally locked. Yamla ( talk) 20:52, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited King Faisal Prize, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SR.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi Xpërt100! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! -- Toddy1 (talk) 10:27, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
What are you trying to achieve with the </nowiki> that you entered into the article on Umar?
As you can see, they both look the same. (1) lacks this feature, (2) has it.
-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:27, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Kriti Kharbanda, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Ab207 ( talk) 14:17, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Per MOS:FONTSIZE, please do not use small font in infoboxes, navboxes or similar items that already use a reduced font. Thanks. DrKay ( talk) 18:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Ok, Thanks @DrKay! After removing "< small >...< /small >" this, then can I use "{{ small|"... please tell me! Thank Xpërt100 ( talk) 18:46, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Both of you! Should I revert those articles, which I did? Xpërt100 ( talk) 20:08, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
You were asked not to put small font in infoboxes, navboxes or similar items that already use a reduced font. But you have just done it again in this edit to Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr. -- Toddy1 (talk) 19:30, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
<small>...</small>
with replace with {{
small}}
. It's my mistake.. I am not read it properly, surely I shall improved that I have done mistake before! I Apologize for it! Thanks for telling me @Toddy1
Xpërt100 (
talk) 22:06, 19 September 2021 (UTC)Hello. You've nominated a few articles for speedy deletion today, with a deletion rationale of "Full article based on one reference". That's not a valid reason to speedy delete an article. Please review WP:CSD carefully before nominating any more articles for speedy deletion. Thanks. 2A01:4C8:A6:738:4FF:82E7:7FA3:C70A ( talk) 11:14, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Oh! Thanks @2A01:4C8:A6:738:4FF:82E7:7FA3:C70A Xpërt100 ( talk) 11:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Having just put 10 hours into extensive but universally minor redactions of the article Muspilli, essentially all of which were concerned merely with citation formatting, and most of which are invisible to casual examination, I was shocked and appalled to see your un-do of them all.
I cannot assume anything good from your use of the word "vandalism", and am frankly offended by it. It was either a reactionary remark, or a snide comment, or impatience at the possibility of reviewing extensive changes.
On the hopes that you might come to your senses given time to think. I've restored the changed text. If you have some objection to that change, please let me know on my talk page, and I will try my best to fix whatever you think is broken. Quite frankly, this was a 1 hour fixup that got way out of hand; lacking a call from you to fix up any mess I've made, I won't be looking back. If you redo the undo, I won't reverse it again, but rather take it as a sign that you are incorrigible, and that my time is better spent elsewhere.
The flaw in the article in its prior form is that the citations were only in text, and not linked to the citations in the bibliography. The flaw (still) with the citations in the bibliography is that they are not in template format. In that form, they cannot be used for any kind of linked reference, including Harvard-style references and HTML "<ref>...</ref>" style. Since the embedded citations (some of them poorly done, since only parenthetic page numbers were used, without author and year) were done in what was approximately "<ref>...</ref>" style, that's what I turned them into.
The citations in the article are sub-standard. They need to be fixed. If you think it's appropriate to erase the fixes that I made, then go and do it your way. Leaving the references as they stood is not okay.
You might be alarmed that I deleted the parenthetic years embedded along with the authors' names in the text (e.g. "Smith (1892)" became "Smith[ref#]"), but since that information is already present in the linked to citation, contained in the superscript number, I thought about it and decided that it was unnecessary excess information. The date is in the linked reference.
In order to be conservative, I left the bibliography as-is, in place. Technically, the duplicates references should be weeded out, but I have no great motivation ever to get to that, and planned on leaving it for someone else
If you don't want me to do it, then you could consider taking on the job of
Astro-Tom-ical ( talk) 17:57, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled " Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Edit summary content is visible in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 ( talk) 18:13, 15 September 2021 (UTC) Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 ( talk) 18:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Ok, Thanks! @Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry | Discord: Blaze Wolf#0001 Xpërt100 ( talk) 18:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 19:22, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Saad al Ghamdi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Macca. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 06:03, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
You need to find primary sources describing this publisher. Mission statements and claims about fact checking need secondary sources discussing them. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 18:24, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sahih al-Bukhari, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eid.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello Xpërt100! Your additions to King Faisal Prize in Service to Islam 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.
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. DanCherek ( talk) 14:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. ~
TNT (she/they •
talk) 19:58, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Xpërt100 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
If you read " WP:BP" then you will realize that the main purpose of block of an user or ip address to prevent vandalism (Wikipedia articles). But, if you looks at the contributions I've made over the last month, to make the Wikipedia article better and protect it from vandalism (attackers)...then you'll be realize, I am not that type of person you are finding about.. I am not here to vandalism Wikipedia; I am here to make Wikipedia a good knowledge source. Now, if you think I should be blocked then you also break the rule of blocking policies; it would not to be considered the real blocking policies, it would be WP:BLOCKNOTPUNITIVE. Now it's your choice! I have nothing more to say. I really enjoyed to working here, Wikipedia just a feeling! Thanks!! --- Xpërt100 ( talk) 20:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This does not address your violations of WP:SOCK and WP:EVADE. Additionally, your original account was so abusive, it has been globally locked. Yamla ( talk) 20:52, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited King Faisal Prize, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SR.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)