Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!

October 2012

edit

  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Naseeb.com. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Mephistophelian (contact) 23:41, 4 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

  Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Naseeb.com with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Mephistophelian (contact) 00:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

  This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Naseeb.com. Mephistophelian (contact) 00:13, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

  • Hello, Myrnahera. I feel that the above messages have probably not been very helpful to you, as they have not made clear what the problem with your editing is, so I will try to help you by explaining the situation. I am sure that "vandalize" was the wrong word to use, as you have probably been acting in good faith. However, there are reasons why your editing has been unacceptable. Firstly, you have provided no sources to support the claims you have made. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, there is nothing at all to stop anyone from posting false information here, and unfortunately that does happen a lot. Consequently, we can't just accept your word for it: some anonymous person editing Wikipedia saying "I know this from my own experience" is not a reliable source. The need for reliable sources is especially strong in cases where editors make negative claims about people or organisations, perhaps even accusations of criminal activity, as seems to be the case with your editing. Also, Wikipedia is not a medium for promotion of anything, including promotion of a campaign to "expose" a business that you think is unethical. IF there are reliable published sources that question the bona fides of Naseeb.com, then it will be perfectly acceptable to record the doubts, with a reference to such sources, but even then it should be in the form of "so and so has raised such and such doubts", rather than in the form of a direct accusation. Wikipedia does not "take sides". Finally, a much less important point, but one which may be helpful to you. I had never heard of the word "escroc", so I did a web search for it. I came across numerous sources showing that it is a French word, but I have not been able to find any evidence whatever that it is in use in English. If it is used in English, then it is so obscure and uncommon that most English speaking readers will not know what it means, so using it in English language Wikipedia is probably unhelpful. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply