User talk:Wikibiryalanmakinesi

CS1 error on Baykar Bayraktar TB3

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Baykar Bayraktar TB3, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:10, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tractor SC and PGPL

Where do you see that Tractor S.C. won the Persian Gulf Pro League? I don't see them finishing higher than second. —C.Fred (talk) 01:31, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

they did today. There is two weeks left to end and they are 8 points difference from the second team. Do mathematically they have won it. Wikibiryalanmakinesi (talk) 05:06, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't edit subjects that you are not familiar with

you are obviously not following football in Iran. But you go around and reverse my edits. That's not a professional behaviour. You might have more edits but you clearly aren't doing a logical job. The team has won the title today and all region is celebrating the title. You better stay away from editing pages that you don't have a clue about. You are just wasting othe editors time. Wikibiryalanmakinesi (talk) 05:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 2025

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in politics, ethnic relations, and conflicts involving Armenia, Azerbaijan, or both. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Mellk (talk) 10:26, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2025

Hello, I'm Shadow4dark. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Shadow4dark (talk) 20:05, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which article and which change? Be specific Wikibiryalanmakinesi (talk) 23:13, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i found it. Selçuk Bayraktar told in a live interview. I added a new source. The previous claim didn't have a source either. I encourage you to not reverse edits about subjects you don't have knowledge about. Not every single piece of information is cited in Wiki. You need to ask before reversing, that's the point of opening a conversation. Wikibiryalanmakinesi (talk) 23:25, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

read WP:OR and above policies you can't add random numbers this is not how Wikipedia works. Shadow4dark (talk) 13:12, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 2025

Please do not add or change content, as you did at HQ-9, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 00:13, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARMYRECOGNITION is not a reliable source either. WP:REFBOMBing with unreliable sources is not productive.

For you, it would be easier just to wait for reports from mainstream news or other some other "big name" publication, rather than guessing on reliability. Patience is all that is required. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 13:10, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at HQ-9, you may be blocked from editing. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 20:47, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i added Forbes to sources. If you act more childish I will make sure you get banned. Wikibiryalanmakinesi (talk) 21:34, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also you have undone my other edits. This is vandalism. Wikibiryalanmakinesi (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 23:07, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Link to ANI thread. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 05:57, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content.

If you believe that 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 ~~~~}}. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:52, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Personal attack removed) Wikibiryalanmakinesi (talk) 07:44, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is ridiculous

i added four sources including a source from Forbes. If you don't unblock me immediately, I will take this to public. Wikibiryalanmakinesi (talk) 03:09, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Making threats won't get you unblocked, this happened because you were causing disruption to Wikipedia and it didn't stop after multiple people tried to explain the problem to you over several months.

Look at all the warnings you've been given on your Talk page. It doesn't matter if one source is good if the others are bad - you've still added bad sources that other volunteers have to fix in their own time and that's not fair on them.

Please try to understand why you were blocked - look at your previous edits then read Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability for an explanation.

Only after you fully understand why your editing was causing disruption and how to avoid it in future, please read and follow the Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. Blue Sonnet (talk) 05:28, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The guy took my sources and posted the edit eventually. I added 4 sources including one from Forbes. He has gone around and has undone all of my edits. I cannot believe the nonsense going on on this platform. I feel so stupid for all time I spent on editing in this platform. I don't want to even be unblocked and contribute to this digital tyranny. Wikibiryalanmakinesi (talk) 07:39, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 2025

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 01:35, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your talk page access has been revoked due to your grossly inappropriate behavior on this page, including slurs and other personal attacks. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 01:31, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]