Please remain calm when talking to other editors and refrain from alleging that someone is taking part in prohibited activities. In a post at Talk:Saudi_Arabian-led_intervention_in_Yemen#Israel.27s_support you called another editor a spammer and accused them of being "butthurt" because they did not retain your version of an article. If someone has reverted or removed something you added and you believe that your version was correct, you need to calmly ask why it was removed and what needs to be done for it to be kept. DO NOT respond with personal attacks, as not only does this make other less inclined to want to work with you but it also puts you at risk of getting blocked from editing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)10:22, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also recommend that you hold off on making a lot of page moves until you are more familiar with editing on Wikipedia. For example, you moved Mubarak Al-Sabah to Mubarak the Great. While he was known under that name, this isn't the most common name for him and typically Wikipedia will only list someone under a different name is they are almost solely known under that title. It's fairly rare for royalty of any type to be listed under anything other than their formal name. Because of this, I'd prefer that rather than move pages of your own accord that you instead open up move requests on the talk pages. Sometimes articles do need to be moved, but sometimes they're at a specific name for a reason and this may not be immediately apparent for newer users. This doesn't mean that you can't, just that I'd recommend that you wait until you're more experienced. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)10:30, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Edit warring at Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen
Your recent editing history 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. Mztourist (talk) 07:55, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you were implying that I have been complicit in addition of BS casualty figures than I'm sorry but that is not the case. I have never condoned addition of unsourced or improperly sourced information. If some BS casualty figures were added in the last day or so and I haven't reverted them than that's because I haven't been active around Wikipedia for more than 24 hours. Now that I did check the article, I did revert an unsourced edit. Cheers! EkoGraf (talk) 04:35, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
