Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 08:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Short answer, not really no. Reverting the article back and forth will not improve it - it will just create what we call an Edit War. My advice would be to post about the picture and the sources at the Deletion debate. Other editors can discuss them and disagree with them, but they cannot be removed from the debate. If the sources are good, other editors will notice and agree, and consensus will emerge that they should be included. As for the picture - it seems to be public domain, which means we can use it. If you dispute that, tell us why at the debate. I can't lock the article down, but if you give us the information, you might show that the subject is notable, and the article could be kept. UltraExactZZSaid~ Did19:13, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I believe she is referring to my username. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kabirat (talk • contribs) 19:16, 6 December 2012 (UTC) By the way, I have every reason to believe that this wikipedia profile is actually the subject herself. A tracing of her IP address to Texas would verify this suspicion. It is already suspicious that her username was created immediately following edits to her subject page. Furthermore, the individual has only made edits with respect to one page since that time, also suggesting that it is the subject herself. The grammatical mistakes are also indicative of a person who is not a native English speaker, just like the subject.[reply]
That's as may be, but what's more disturbing is that you're both edit-warring over the article. Please stop editing it and discuss the problems on the talk page, both of you. I'll also warn the IP. Edit warring is the sort of thing that ends up in blocks, and I'd like to avoid that if possible. Please tell me that's possible. UltraExactZZSaid~ Did19:25, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
With regards to the books, I've edited to strike a proper medium. The controversial comments should remain as they are verifiable. They were initially on the subject's facebook page which was public (I personally saw them) which she has since deleted. As to the picture it is in the public domain, the subject can blame herself for that result. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kabirat (talk • contribs) 19:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sorenaaryamanesh! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Benzband (I'm a Teahouse host)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 09:12, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Amir-Abbas Fakhravar. 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.
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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; 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.
Please note that the other editors involved have started discussing this on the talk page, but you have not, so your advice in an edit summary to discuss this is disingenuous, to say the least.Phil Bridger (talk) 21:20, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
