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

Welcome to Wikipedia, Fad Ariff! I am Blablubbs 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 out Wikipedia:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message on my 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 a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome! Blablubbs|talk 13:16, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting 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 to Articles 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 subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes 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 resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User: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 to User: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 and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 14:53, 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 the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 14:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia: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 creating Francisco 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 help Mccapra (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 as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

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

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

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

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 a WP: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 if this 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 a section 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 at WP: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 at WP:REV: "Reverting is appropriate mostly for vandalism or other disruptive edits." or at WP: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 (see WP: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 the draft 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 creating Batang West Side.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

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

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 the Teahouse.

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

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

Your recent article submission to Articles 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 at Human 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 resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft: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 and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

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

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

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting 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 on Draft: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 at Talk: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 to Articles 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 resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft: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 and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

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

On 3 February 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Execution of Majidreza Rahnavard, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Majidreza Rahnavard was the first Iranian to be executed in public in connection with the Mahsa Amini protests? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template: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 to the 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 the Did 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 your WP: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 under WP: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 under WP: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 at Talk:SpaceX Starship regarding a note that a user is repeatedly trying to insert into the "failures" section. The thread is RfC 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 to Abbāsi House as you did not add a source 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 been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide 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 count 1 2 3 4 5 (this one has a fake doi) instances of articles with fake references, and these 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 be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide 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 the Unblock 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 by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

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

Hello, Fad Ariff. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft: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 months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request 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 the Articles for Creation submission or Draft 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 encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request 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 article Shahram Poursafi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia: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]