User talk:Emrahthehistorist17

January 2024

Hello, I'm Padgriffin. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Gothic Wars have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 01:52, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Padgriffin Hello. Can you educate me on contributing to wikipedia? For example, what resources can I add or to what extent can I improve the page? I am a researcher and I really want to contribute to wikipedia and improve it. I would be very glad if you help. Thanks. Emrahthehistorist17 (talk) 02:05, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are many resources related to Roman and Greek history. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome/Guides for an introduction. I would also generally take a look at WP:CLOSEPARA and WP:RS for general guidance on how we use sources and which sources should be used. Ifly6 (talk) 07:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Gothic Wars, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 01:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Padgriffin Hello, I will pay attention. Thank you. Emrahthehistorist17 (talk) 02:07, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Hello, I'm NebY. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Alexander the Great have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. NebY (talk) 09:26, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:40, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Editing tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:39, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mass edits to infoboxes

Please desist from your mass edits to infoboxes (some of which are listed below) which deviate from the standard templating of |result=. See {{infobox military conflict}}: result – optional – this parameter may use one of two standard terms: "X victory" or "Inconclusive". The term used is for the "immediate" outcome of the "subject" conflict and should reflect what the sources say.

~~I would greatly appreciate it if you could also go back and revert these non-standard parameters.~~ (Edit. I believe I have now found all related cases in your, thankfully not-too-long, edit history.) I will also note that this has been raised before to you in edit summaries, specifically this instance on 12 February. Ifly6 (talk) 07:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please WP:COMMUNICATE beyond a petulant Do not delete my additions and blank edit summaries – 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 – or I will ask for further action. Your edits to some of these infoboxes are also egregious. See Talk:Roman–Seleucid war#Revert, 1 March 2024:

Reverted some drive-by edits to the infobox which included a very strange line Roman Republic conquered Syria which is complete nonsense when Syria is wikilinked to Roman Syria and only absurdly misleading when "Syria" means the Selucid Empire. As to the bolding of certain participants, I find it strange to emphasise Hannibal (who largely played no part in fighting) and Scipio Africanus (who was ill at the decisive battle and played no part in it).

This specific article I know more about mostly because I wrote it. The article gives no support to your positions, which is contrary to MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE. You assert that Rome took Roman Syria in this conflict, which is (1) unsupported by the article, (2) lacks any reliable sources, and (3) plainly false. You assert it is part of a series of wars between the Romans and Greeks which is an unsourced WP:DISAMB page. There is no reason to believe this conflict is a "part of" a larger conflict. Again, see {{infobox military conflict}} documentation. Ifly6 (talk) 14:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding on to the previous list of blank edit summaries, second reverts: 1, 2, 3. Ifly6 (talk) 15:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ifly6 As long as you delete my edits like this, your website will never improve. It's done. Emrahthehistorist17 (talk) 15:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits are actively detrimental to the infoboxes, which are meant to summarise the article rather than supplant them. Some edits of these edits are blatantly false, contradict the reliable sources, and contradict the article itself. Paeans to your [my?] website improvement do not substitute for WP:VER or MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE. If you want to improve Wikipedia, I recommend real contributions to the article text rather than insisting on your drive-by infobox vandalism inconsistent with, from above, this parameter may use one of two standard terms: "X victory" and term used is for the "immediate" outcome of the "subject" conflict. Ifly6 (talk) 16:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Please stop. If you continue to assume ownership of articles, you may be blocked from editing. Behavior such as this is regarded as disruptive, and is a violation of Wikipedia policy. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:58, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 Okay, I won't edit your ridiculous site anymore. You're not using any reliable sources anyway, so continue doing whatever you want for your own pleasure. Now stop texting me or I will report you. Emrahthehistorist17 (talk) 16:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Burning of the Ottoman flagship off Chios. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:25, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

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. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:17, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Roman–Sasanian War of 421–422, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Iranians. 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) 18:03, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Emrahthehistorist17 mass edits to infoboxes. Ifly6 (talk) 18:51, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ifly6 I didn't do anything, okey? If you don't want me to edit Wikipedia, I'll give up on that. Emrahthehistorist17 (talk) 05:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have done many things. I have no problem with your editing Wikipedia. I have a problem with your disrupting the encyclopaedia. Multiple times people have told you to stop editing the infoboxes in a manner contrary to guidance, adding unsourced claims based on a dimly misremembered recollection on the topic or poorly understood idea of the article topic, and to stop adding anachronistic flags. The reason why I made attempts to ping administrators is because you have utterly refused to have a discussion about this behaviour. Instead, you have asserted a series of personalist motives and denied the existence of explanations and text directly in front of you. If you are willing to discuss your edits instead of blithely proceeding with them, this will be much more useful and everyone's time will be much better spent. Ifly6 (talk) 04:59, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ifly6 What do want me to do? Okay I won't have done these things anymore, if it is still true. Emrahthehistorist17 (talk) 05:05, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ifly6 I'm just trying to improve Wikipedia. I'm sorry if I did anything wrong. Emrahthehistorist17 (talk) 05:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you understand that Wikipedia has guidelines? They include ones like MOS:INFOBOXFLAG and MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, which specify how flags should be used in infoboxes and what information should go into them (stuff that is said in the article). Many of the edits you have made break these guidelines. Ifly6 (talk) 13:36, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roman–Seleucid war

Spurius Ligustinus did not play a major part in the Roman–Seleucid war and is not mentioned a single time in the article. Please read MOS:INFOBOX, the cosmetic edits you do to infoboxes are rule-breaking and not helpful. Catlemur (talk) 17:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Catlemur Okay, I changed Hannibal and Ligustinus, but don't delete my other additions. Emrahthehistorist17 (talk) 19:32, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since Roman–Seleucid war is a GA article, you should be getting consensus(on the article talk page) for any changes/additions to this article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:06, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Catlemur @Kansas Bear The bolded SCIPIO AFRICANUS in the infobox should also be removed. The Roman commander at Magnesia with the auspices was Asiagenes. Africanus was, according to the most reliable sources, ill. Even if he wasn't ill, as some have supposed, he claimed he was ill to make sure that the credit went to his brother. That too should be reverted. Ifly6 (talk) 04:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice, 29 March 2024

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Ifly6 (talk) 05:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

You have attempted to add unnecessary information to the infobox on Sack of Constantinople five times[1][2][3][4][5], now.

You have been warned multiple times and even been taken to AN/I over your editing, while ignoring what other editors have told you. Continue to edit war at your own risk. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:24, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kansas Bear risk? Emrahthehistorist17 (talk) 00:28, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Risk? You are edit warring, what do you think will happen? You have been reverted on the Sack of Constantinople by 3 different editors, and yet you ignore what you've been told on your talk page and continue to edit war. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kansas Bear I am sorry if I made a mistake. But what I supposed to do to edit wikipedia? Emrahthehistorist17 (talk) 00:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]