User talk:ALSHEIKHULSHEIKH

Population data

You recently added current (as of 2014) population data to several Pakistani cities including Sialkot, Gujrat City and Bhalwal, but you didn't provide sources for that data, and for Sialkot it seems likely that you mixed up the city and the district. Where did you get that information? Huon (talk) 14:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to List of most populous cities in Pakistan 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: List of most populous cities in Pakistan was changed by ALSHEIKHULSHEIKH (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.857374 on 2015-05-18T10:01:29+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 10:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Noq. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Sialkot, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please stop changing population figures without provide a reliable source that actually backs up the numbers you are specifying. Just quoting a site giving the population for Pakistan as a whole does not do that. noq (talk) 10:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Sargodha 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 12:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Sargodha. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You must provide reliable sources that actually back up the content that you are adding. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 13:37, 18 May 2015 (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:ALSHEIKHULSHEIKH reported by User:Apparition11 (Result: ). Thank you. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 13:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Population data

So now you have been reverted by several editors for the same problematic edits - please listen to what you are being told about those edits rather than just reverting back to your preferred version. To change the population figures you will need to provide a WP:reliable source that actually gives the numbers you want to update - just linking to a page giving overall population figures for Pakistan when you are giving population figures for a city or district will not do. You have been reported for edit warring now and may end up being blocked from editing for a period unless you can show you understand what you are doing wrong. If you don't understand, then ask the question and someone might be able to explain it to you better - ignoring the warnings will not help and will just mean that you are blocked to protect the encyclopaedia. noq (talk) 15:06, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Sargodha

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

The full report is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:ALSHEIKHULSHEIKH reported by User:Apparition11 (Result: Blocked). You have been constantly restoring your preferred version to the article. Has it come to your attention that your version contains red error messages in the reference section, due to missing information? For example, "Cite error: The named reference census.gov.pk was invoked but never defined (see the help page)." It isn't reasonable to engage in edit warring to force this kind of problem into the encyclopedia. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 13:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]