We are more often frightened than hurt; and we suffer more in imagination than in reality. – – Seneca.

Welcome to Wikipedia, Fad Ariff! I amBlablubbs and I am the volunteer who received your account request. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check outWikipedia:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message onmy talk page or type{{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being aWikipedian! Also, when you post ontalk pages you shouldsign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome!Blablubbs|talk13:16, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission toArticles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Timtrent was:

This submission's references do not show that the subjectqualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not showsignificant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject inpublished,reliable,secondary sources that areindependent of the subject (see theguidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (seetechnical help and learn aboutmistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmitwhen they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go toUser:Fad Ariff/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go toUser:Fad Ariff/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned andmay be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced anyuntoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at theArticles for creation help desk, on thereviewer's talk page or useWikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me14:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,Fad Ariff!Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at theArticles for creation help desk. If you have anyother questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at theTeahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me14:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at theWikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk)22:18, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for creatingFrancisco Rodríguez Marín. When we translate or borrow from other language wikis it’s a requirement to acknowledge the source. The best way to do this is to include it in your edit summary (e.g. “translated from es.wiki”) and there’s also a translation template you can add to the talk page. I’ve added it to the talk page for you so you can use it for future articles. Happy editing and please leave a message on my talk page if you need any helpMccapra (talk)12:55, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!Fad Ariff (talk)12:33, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mass surveillance in Iran, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed asC-Class, which is recorded on itstalk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at thegrading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can nowcreate articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work toArticles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at thehelp desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option tocreate articles yourself without posting a request toArticles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please considerleaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

~Styyx^Talk?08:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These two reverts[1] and[2] were made less than 24 hours apart, making them aWP:1RR violation (as well as being v. unnecessary). Please self-revert.Iskandar323 (talk)13:24, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Iskandar323: Yes of course, I will always self revert in such situations. Since your edits were made over a week ago and there have been many edits since then, then a draft may be necessary before adding your edits back to the article. Let me know ifthis draft is ok with you. Once you ratify it, I’ll move it to the article. If anything is missing you can add it to the draft before I make the edit.

Are you aware that you have not discussed any of these edits on the talk page (despite me starting asection there for you)?.

Also, are you aware of these violations you've been making on that article?[3][4]?Fad Ariff (talk)13:09, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Asking endless questions about another editor's edits is a behaviour examined atWP:BADGER -"The fact that you have a question, concern, or objection does not mean that others are obligated to answer, much less satisfy you with their answers." Similarly, not understanding or even not liking an edit is not a reason to revert it. As is noted atWP:REV:"Reverting is appropriate mostly for vandalism or other disruptive edits." or atWP:REVERT:"Consider very carefully before reverting, as it rejects the contributions of another editor. Consider what you object to, and what the editor was attempting. Can you improve the edit, bringing progress, rather than reverting it? Can you revert only part of the edit, or do you need to revert the whole thing? I made 8 edits, each with edit summaries, and you reverted all of them, including the simply addition of author links, for reasons that, judging by your questions, even you do not fully understand. One might be forgiven for thinking you were trying to find fault. This, and the lack of partial reverting on your part (seeWP:REVONLY), hints at either a lack of thoughtfulness or a lack of good faith on your part before reverting.Iskandar323 (talk)14:10, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Iskandar323: I don't think I could have posed my questions any easier to follow. Either approve thedraft and I'll make the revert, or go ahead and update the draft and I'll make the revert with your updated version.Fad Ariff (talk)13:17, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the point. The point is if you only have questions about edits and not clear reasons to believe that they are either disruptive (either intentionally or unintentionally), you should not be reverting them. Re: your draft, I don't think you should be restoring the page from a non-live copy hosted on your sandbox. That is no way to go about editing a page unless you are performing a full rewrite on a page not being worked on by any other editors. You should manually revert yourself and I suggest just copying the original edits. I'm happy to make this easier - I primarily care about the edits to the page structure: you can forget about the bsn tags, author links (which I already re-added) and the other minor content edits, because the rest of this was fairly trivial stuff.Iskandar323 (talk)13:45, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Iskandar323: It appears you still want to talk about this. What do you feel we have pending here?Fad Ariff (talk)12:02, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Fad Ariff,

Thank you for creatingBatang West Side.

I have taggedthe page as having some issues to fix, as a part of ourpage curation process and note that:

Thanks for the article! However, I've tagged close paraphrasing from Variety, see alsohere.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with{{Re|VickKiang}}. Remember to sign your reply with~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit theTeahouse.

Delivered via thePage Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

VickKiang(talk)01:28, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission toArticles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:

This needs to be discussed atHuman rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran whether it should be split out from that.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmitafter they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go toDraft:Criticism of the Islamic Republic of Iran and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned andmay be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced anyuntoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at theArticles for creation help desk, on thereviewer's talk page or useWikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark •sniff)16:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. Alleligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

TheArbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting theWikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to imposesite bans,topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. Thearbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please reviewthe candidates and submit your choices on thevoting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add{{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fad Ariff! Thanks for your work onDraft:Criticism of the Islamic Republic of Iran. You're doing a great job but I wanted to let you know that comments from the reviewer and tags that say it was declined shouldn't be removed manually. They will be removed automatically once the page is approved, but until then we just leave them there.BuySomeApples (talk)05:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per the last reviewer's comments, I started a conversation about this draft over atTalk:Human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran.BuySomeApples (talk)05:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BuySomeApples: thank you for your notification and participation.Fad Ariff (talk)13:06, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission toArticles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:

Please wait until consensus has been determined at the split proposal discussion.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmitafter they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go toDraft:Criticism of the Islamic Republic of Iran and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned andmay be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced anyuntoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at theArticles for creation help desk, on thereviewer's talk page or useWikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark •sniff)22:47, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On3 February 2023,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleExecution of Majidreza Rahnavard, which you recently nominated. The fact was... thatMajidreza Rahnavard was the first Iranian to be executed in public in connection with theMahsa Amini protests? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Execution of Majidreza Rahnavard. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Execution of Majidreza Rahnavard), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on theDid you know talk page.

--RoySmith(talk)00:02, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thank you!Fad Ariff (talk)12:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of whether the page blanking was an accident, please revert yourWP:1RR breach.Iskandar323 (talk)12:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking the page, which you already know I did in error, was not a revert. Also there isn't anything in that talk page that says the article is underWP:1RR.Fad Ariff (talk)12:38, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need a notice. You are already well aware of the post-1978 Iranian politics sanctions that are in place. Please self-revert.Iskandar323 (talk)13:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Iskandar323: If I had made a 1RR mistake, I would self-revert (as I have in any previous occasion), but my initial edit was not a revert and also nothing in that talk page says the article is underWP:1RR or post-1978 Iranian politics sanctions (Hawkins was American, not Iranian). Please stop coming to my talk page with these bad faith attempts to override the substantiality of the sources provided in those discussions.Fad Ariff (talk)12:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion atTalk:SpaceX Starship regarding a note that a user is repeatedly trying to insert into the "failures" section. The thread isRfC on "clarifying failure in infobox". Thank you.DASL51984^{(Speak to me!)}19:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Fad Ariff, I reverted your edit toAbbāsi House as you did not add asource for the additions. Feel free to add the content again once you have a source.Nobody (talk)14:27, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you using ChatGPT to get citations? It seems you are adding a lot of fake citations to articles.MarioGom (talk)18:32, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have beenblockedindefinitely from editing for persistently makingdisruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read theguide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page:{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Moneytrees🏝️(Talk)19:17, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I currently count12345 (this one has a fake doi) instances of articles with fake references, andthese are either extremely obscure or do not exist. Your entire edit history will likely need to be examined for forgery or misrepresentations of sources. Aside from this this you mostly focus on POV-pushing in the IRANPOL topic area, frequently getting into disputes with others. As a whole your editing has been highly problematic and disruptive.Moneytrees🏝️(Talk)19:32, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may beused abusively. It has beenblocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts areallowed, but not forillegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may bereverted ordeleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review theguide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use theUnblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators:Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or byadministrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation'sprivacy policy. Youmust not loosen or remove this block, or issue anIP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committeemay be summarily desysopped.

Moneytrees🏝️(Talk)00:58, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Fad Ariff. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know thatDraft:Criticism of the Islamic Republic of Iran, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six monthsmay be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, pleaseedit it again orrequest that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you canrequest it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia.FireflyBot (talk)23:03, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Fad Ariff. It has been over six months since you last edited theArticles for Creation submission orDraft page you started, "Criticism of the Islamic Republic of Iran".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopediamainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you canrequest its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing.Liz^Read!Talk!22:48, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleShahram Poursafi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.

The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shahram Poursafi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

YRhyre (talk)10:08, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation through AfC