User talk:Hth-Oguz Han

Hi Hth-Oguz Han! I noticed your contributions to Oghuz Khagan and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:41, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Oghuz languages, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:42, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make unexplained changes to information on Wikipedia, as you did at Abraham.

tgeorgescu (talk)  09:46, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Abraham 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 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. tgeorgescu (talk) 09:54, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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:Hth-Oguz_Han reported by User:Tgeorgescu (Result: ). Thank you. tgeorgescu (talk) 10:00, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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:Hth-Oguz_Han reported by User:Tgeorgescu (Result: ). Thank you. tgeorgescu (talk) 10:13, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Abraham) for a period of 1 week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ashleyyoursmile! 11:45, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Islam. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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. Jeppiz (talk) 20:38, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prophets of the Qur'an has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Whiteguru (talk) 12:31, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prophets of the Qur'an has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Editor2020 (talk) 23:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• In
  WP:DIGITS), but I don't know what the number is supposed to be. Should that say "24,000" (twenty-four thousand) or "240,000" (two hundred forty thousand)? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:41, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

This is the POV of the article:

"After a century of exhaustive archaeological investigation, no evidence has been found for a historical Abraham.[7]"

Which means Abraham is an unhistoric literary figure and, as such, per

Category:Israelite prophets of Islam has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:57, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Arab prophets of Islam has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Prophets of Islam has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:01, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Aaron into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 22:54, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hth-Oguz Han, I've done this for you at the

copyright violation and could get Wikipedia into trouble. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 13:15, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply

]