Unknowncoolio

Welcome!

Hello, Unknowncoolio, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions have removed content without an explanation. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and how to develop articles
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• Article wizard for creating new articles
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 01:10, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi i'm deleting this because. You idiots won't delete don't you understand that this is inappropriate. And most of what is written is not true and is not even mentioned in those articles you have linked. How can you allow that !!!

We're working on vetting the information. It takes time, especially since there aren't a lot of people who read Danish on the English Wikipedia. The English sources are being vetted, and so far it sounds like they're checking out. —C.Fred (talk) 01:58, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much. And what can i do to delete this page, i am related to this guy. This page has brought a lot of hate his way, is it possible to delete or do i have to keep trying to delete what is written by the edit page button.

You've started a deletion discussion, but those typically run seven days while the community decides what to do with the article. Also, because you are related to him, you should not edit the article directly. You may request changes at Talk:Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha, but you'll need to be specific in your request and indicate what published reliable source or what Wikipedia policy supports your edit. —C.Fred (talk) 02:05, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Also you should've noticed that almost all of the articles you linked are outdated and or deleted, so how can you gather information around from something that isn't there anymore. Only the last part in this whole wikipage is true and has a recent article link. So why can't you delete the rest?

References with dead links are still valid references. It does slow down the verification process, though. —C.Fred (talk) 02:15, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

But why do you think they deleted the references? It's because they were wrong. You've got most of it wrong the only true part in that page is the most recent part, that happened in 2014 everything else is either wrong or outdated info that is irrelevant now. And why are you struggling this much, why can't you just delete it and make everyone happy it doesn't matter it's just a wiki-page which contains no big or exciting news/history so why do you have to keep it. Just delete already and let's move on !

That's not necessarily true. Sites reorganize, change link styles, and do any number of other things. There's no reason to speedy delete it; we'll have to see how the deletion discussion goes. —C.Fred (talk) 02:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah but it is true in this case and why can't you speed delete it doesn't matter nobody is going to complain if it is removed, meanwhile i am complaining because it is there. Don't you care about your readers, like what harm does do if you just delete it right now.

Other readers are saying to keep it. Again, the article does not meet any of the criteria for speedy deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 02:31, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Other readers? he is not even that famous. This story was 2 years ago. It cannot be true that there are readers who care this much about this wiki-page now. And so what if it doesn't meet any of the criteria, i'm writing back and forth with you because you are a human, not a robot that only cares about the rules. Look i can guarantee you that if you delete and someone complains about i will personally write everything exactly as it was.

November 2016

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha was changed by Unknowncoolio (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.899408 on 2016-11-23T01:07:21+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 01:07, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you.  {MordeKyle}  ☢ 01:10, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

[[User:MordeKyle| you cannot keep this page up read what i wrote this is unacceptable. This person doesn't want something like that written about him especially when most of is not even true and isn't even written in those links you linked !!!!

Help me!

Delete this Wikipage, it is about a relative and he does not want to be written about in this page it is a breach of his civil rights

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamad_Al-Khaled_Samha

Unknowncoolio (talk) 01:39, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is only marginally interested in whether a subject wants to be written about if reliable sources have covered the subject. That's not a breach of civil rights either; there is no right not to be written about. This article furthermore does seem to cite newspapers and other reliable sources. If there are concerns about the content, please be more specific. Huon (talk) 01:45, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) As a general rule, the subject of an article (or one of his family members) cannot request that an article be taken down. Please review WP:Autobiographies for more information on restrictions on what he can do, or you can do on his behalf, related to his article.

Also, as a general rule, if a subject has been written about in the press, it is not a violation of his civil rights to base an article on the information that the press has reported. —C.Fred (talk) 01:48, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

But there are several parts of what is written that isn't from the news articles so how do you remove those parts, cause they aren't true. And it is a breach of law if something not true is written a about someone on a major information website.

So if I follow you, you want the statement "Al-Khaled…was never charged or asked about this matter by the Danish or the German police" removed? This is one of several examples in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 01:54, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes either way the references aren't even linked to any articles. So it's like if i make a new wiki page on somebody unknown just because i want to diss them, and then link some references from articles who doesn't even exist !

Unknowncoolio, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Unknowncoolio! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like AmaryllisGardener (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

November 2016

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)

I noticed your recent edit to Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha does not have an edit summary. 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:

• User contributions
• Recent changes
• Watchlists
• Revision differences
• IRC channels
• Related changes
• New pages list
• Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:00, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Guidance on how to contribute to articles when you have a conflict of interest

Hello, Unknowncoolio. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
• instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
• when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 01:09, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

So you are not deleting it ? Is that what you are trying to tell me ?

It's too early to say. The discussion will run a week. —C.Fred (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

November 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha. You've been cautioned repeatedly that you can't just remove sourced material. You've also been cautioned that you shouldn't be removing any material from the article because you're related to the subject. I strongly suggest you confine your activities in this article to its talk page, lest you be blocked for disruption. —C.Fred (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

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:Unknowncoolio reported by User:Mr. Vernon (Result: ). Thank you. Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

November 2016

Your recent editing history at Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha 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. Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:17, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

• And to be clear, this edit is at least your third—and arguably your fourth—revert to the article within the past 24 hours. —C.Fred (talk) 01:22, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

• With this edit, you have violated the three-revert rule. Would you like to restore the text yourself, or would you prefer to have administrative action taken to prevent further disruption of the article? —C.Fred (talk) 01:37, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Your last edit was removing an explicit link to a news source which quoted the subject of the article. If this was an attempt to justify removing the quote, it isn't going to work. Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:38, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Just delete it already i know you can...

So I take it that you have refused my offer for one last chance to self-revert? —C.Fred (talk) 01:41, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

I think he wants you to "just delete" the article. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:43, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

What will happen if i refuse. Will you ban me ? I could just change the ip adress come back on. But why go through all of that commotion. Why can't leave it be? Your principles and laws doesn't even make sense. You say you need a creditable reference but almost all of the references on that page is outdated and can't even be read because they are deleted. So what the fuck is it?

Either you will be blocked—that's you as a person, regardless of the IP you use—or the article will be protected against edits by new or unregistered users.

There will also be an almost perverse side effect: because you got blocked, people will question whether your AfD nomination was in good faith or in an attempt to maliciously remove the article. So, it may make it harder to get the article deleted. —C.Fred (talk) 01:52, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Alright just revert it then but how long before you will discuss the deletion ?

The discussion is already under way. —C.Fred (talk) 01:54, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

When will you have a answer?

As I said before, the normal time for an AfD discussion is one week. —C.Fred (talk) 02:01, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Alright thank you. I won't be changing anything until then,

Hello, I'm DVdm. I noticed that in this edit to Mohamad Al-Khaled Samha, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DVdm (talk) 19:24, 29 November 2016 (UTC)