2804:F14:80B6:3101:E4B9:E400:1C03:F0D3

June 2023

Hello, I'm Egeymi. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. If you continue you will be blocked like 37.39.172.228 Egeymi (talk) 06:04, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Egeymi: Why do you say it's not constructive? It appears to be claiming that the person the page is about currently does business activities, that does not appear to be supported by any source or text in the page? In fact, the page seems to say that he is currently the "Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Interior". – 2804:F14:80B6:3101:E4B9:E400:1C03:F0D3 (talk) 06:10, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

No, it does not. Why are you trying to distort the page? The sentence is well sourced you may see if you look below. --Egeymi (talk) 06:17, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Egeymi: I'm not trying to distort the page. You reported the other IP for vandalism, so I gave the page a look (because I like checking over if vandalism edits are fully reverted), that sentence was added when you rephrased something that the IP you reported for vandalism added. I looked around and did not find a citation or text supporting that that person does business, so I removed it under WP:BLP. If I missed something please do tell me, but I don't see how removing that was in any way unconstructive. 2804:F14:80B6:3101:E4B9:E400:1C03:F0D3 (talk) 06:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Egeymi: Besides everything I've already said, I just want to point out that you reverted and reported 37.39.172.228 for "vandalism after final warning" and now you have changed the starting part of the page to be the exact change they were trying to make. You reverted them 3 times (and changed their version to start with), but if you knew that their information was valid, then wasn't what you did edit warring? – 2804:F14:80B6:3101:E4B9:E400:1C03:F0D3 (talk) 06:48, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Maybe you're right, but the page has been subject to frequent changes which contained only addition of the word "businessman" without giving any source. Now the page has been updated using reliable sources. So please instead of editing it without any source provide sources. Otherwise unsourced edits are reverted. Once again instead of changing or editing with no source just add a source or sources.Egeymi (talk) 07:02, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Egeymi: Yes, "unsourced edits are reverted", please don't frivolously warn me and report me to AIV as a sock for having done just that to your edit, thank you. – 2804:F14:80B6:3101:E4B9:E400:1C03:F0D3 (talk) 07:12, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

It is up to you, as I stated your edits should be backed by sources. My report was due to your unsourced edit, as you know. Egeymi (talk) 07:20, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Egeymi: Have you read WP:BLP? At the very top is this sentence:

[...] Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion

Highlight on "whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable", your addition had no source, the page at the time only had sources that appeared to say that the person the page is about was the current Deputy Prime Minister and the current Minister of Interior with only having business jobs many years ago.

That all tells me that I do not need a source to remove your unsourced addition.

Please explain what you mean. – 2804:F14:80B6:3101:E4B9:E400:1C03:F0D3 (talk) 07:41, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Also just to clarify, I just made a single edit, not edits plural, that single edit removing the sentence "He has also business activities". 2804:F14:80B6:3101:E4B9:E400:1C03:F0D3 (talk) 07:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Then why did not you add a source or sources to correct the incorrect statements in the page as I did? It's my final statement. Egeymi (talk) 07:51, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I made this comment at WP:AIV, because it sort of looked like the AIV report could have just been a misunderstanding. However, Egeymi, @Materialscientist: (an admin) has restored the version of the article by 2804.XXXX, since the sentence was indeed unsourced and should never have been added in the first place. Not sure why you think that adding "He has also business activities" (which is an incredibly vague sentence on its own) is constructive, or how 2804.XXX was distorting the page by reverting vandalism. 67.161.108.178 (talk) 06:31, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

---