User talk:2A02:4540:61:28A9:FAE5:6B08:39B2:33A6

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Almond. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Apply WP:RS sources and follow WP:MOS for formatting. Zefr (talk) 14:42, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Almond shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Zefr (talk) 15:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to insert fringe or undue weight content into articles, as you did at Almond, you may be blocked from editing. The edit summary here states that this IP address may be used by multiple people (referring to "we") who are attempting to establish an Iran-focused view of almond origin and distribution to Iran. This is a fringe concept that the Encyclopedia Britannica and Ladizinsky review do not support. Zefr (talk) 17:24, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please see WP:ISU - Wikipedia encourages only one editor from one IP address or username. Your edit summary ("we") suggests more than one editor is attempting to edit the almond article.

Further, if you are affiliated with Iranica Online, you must declare a conflict of interest, and it is recommended that you not edit Wikipedia articles where a conflict exists; see WP:COI. Zefr (talk) 17:33, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing to do with Iranica, I just don't notice the permanent and senseless removal of Iran from the article despite the presence of reliable sources. 2A02:4540:61:28A9:FAE5:6B08:39B2:33A6 (talk) 20:49, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because your sources provide today's commercial analysis and Irnica provides the historical topic of the plant's origin and origin. 2A02:4540:61:28A9:FAE5:6B08:39B2:33A6 (talk) 20:51, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]