User talk:124.106.129.178

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Nawaz Sharif into Maryam Nawaz. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Diannaa, I wasn't aware that I had to do that, but I will follow that rule next time.

May 2017

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Maryam Nawaz. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 10:24, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

don't lecture me on the evils of reverting an article and do the same yourself.

Your recent editing history at Maryam Nawaz 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 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 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. 331dot (talk) 10:29, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

then stop reverting it yourself

What others do is not relevant to your behavior, which is the only thing you can control. Other users have the right to stop disruption to Wikipedia, which is what you are doing. If you revert again, it will be reported. Please discuss the matter. 331dot (talk) 10:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

dont tell me not to revert something while youre reverting it yourself. if you want to discuss it thats great but dont revert me while asking for discussion.

anyway. what do you want to discuss about that article? I think the stuff I put there is very relevant to the article. why do you disagree?

As I indicated, the standard procedure is, if a bold edit is made, and then reverted, to then leave the page alone and discuss the issue to reach a consensus among editors. I don't yet know the issues about the article, I simply noticed the edit warring. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

arent you doing exactly the same?

I have now hit three reverts and cannot do any more, but as I indicated, any user can act to stop disruption to Wikipedia. The proper procedure is, when an edit is reverted, to leave it alone and discuss the matter. You made an edit to a page, and was reverted, meaning it is up to you to discuss the issue. I have now reported your violation of the same three-revert rule. 331dot (talk) 10:38, 7 May 2017 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:124.106.129.178 reported by User:331dot (Result: ). Thank you. 331dot (talk) 10:36, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

you were doing the same so dont complain

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 10:43, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ok thank you.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.