User talk:Shadow. 547

Welcome!

Hi Shadow. 547! I noticed your contributions to Otrar Catastrophe and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Bamyan (1221) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Siege of Bamyan (1221). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:13, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ashina Revolt moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Ashina Revolt. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:18, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liberation of Khovd moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Liberation of Khovd. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to discussions about infoboxes, and edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:26, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. This is a standard message to inform you that India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:55, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:27, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

dude i didnt even add Mongol victory🤦‍♂️ Shadow. 547 (talk) 16:44, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this and this edit, what do you not understand about MOS:MILRESULT? The relevant page was linked, instead you write yeah the result stuff did get removed because some random guy called Airshipman something like that yeah he didn’t like it and was yapping about Timurid victory should be blah blah blah. If you are simply going to edit war over this, then it suggests that a block is necessary. Mellk (talk) 12:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:Timurid conquests and invasions. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. HistoryofIran (talk) 23:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for making personal attacks and uncivil comments. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 06:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Nishapur moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Siege of Nishapur. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it consists of machine-generated text. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, thank you so much @AirshipJungleman29! @Shadow. 547 AI has a tendency to "hallucinate" and make things up (I saw a fascinating video about a lawyer who used ChatGPT and completely destroyed his court case, the judge was really angry when they found out). It's great that you're trying to fill in gaps in Wikipedia, but so many people use this site that we have to be incredibly careful. I'd recommend rewriting the article from scratch in your own words (you can use the draft as a skeleton) and look for reliable sources, again from scratch because AI isn't good at this part. There are lots of pages to help you do this, and you can use the Teahouse if you need help! I'm learning a lot about copyediting, grammar checking etc. so I'm happy to give your draft a once-over from that perspective before you submit it to AFC if that might be useful for you? Blue-Sonnet (talk) 17:41, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Siege of Moscow (1238), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Siege of Moscow. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Siege of Bamyan (1221) (January 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Snowycats was:

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Mongol invasion of the Khwarazmian Empire. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

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:Siege of Bamyan (1221) 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Snowycats (talk) 05:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No i don’t want it to be merged to mongol invasion of khwarezmian empire i want it to be a seperate article so il keep editing and adding sources Shadow. 547 (talk) 13:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shadow. 547! Having an article draft 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! Snowycats (talk) 05:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Siege of Bamyan (1221) (February 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AirshipJungleman29 were:

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 events). 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.

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Mongol invasion of the Khwarazmian Empire. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

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:Siege of Bamyan (1221) 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:11, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 no offense but i do not understand what u just said like what do u want from me and why is my article not being accepted like can u talk in simple words because my grammar is not good Shadow. 547 (talk) 17:35, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 also im telling you right now i will NOT merge it to the mongol invasion of khwarezmian empitr article i want it to be a seperate article and theres many sources about Bamiyan its just that im lazy so it takes long and i have school aswell Shadow. 547 (talk) 17:54, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So you do understand? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:58, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 Only that but i dont understand why its not being accepted like i put a lot of sources Shadow. 547 (talk) 18:03, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

None of them talk very much about the siege—what we call "significant coverage". Alison Behnke has three sentences, George Kohn has two, Llewelyn Morgan has less than half of one sentence. They are instead focused on the general campaign. Saying "im telling you right now i will NOT merge it to the mongol invasion of khwarezmian empitr article" because you don't like what the sources are saying is not helpful. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 But I literally checked the sources and they describe the text i put in my article and even tho if they are focused on something more than what im talking about theres still sources i can find for my article so just wait a while and it will be accepted (probably) but one question how many sources do i even need so my article gets accepted? Shadow. 547 (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Typically, you need at least three reliable sources that cover the subject in detail. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:13, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 then it will be accepted and it will become a new article? Shadow. 547 (talk) 20:55, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:59, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 hey so i added a few references can u check the article and see if this is good or? because im also gonna be adding a lot of information about the siege of bamiyan because what i found about the siege is interesting but i just wanna know if my article looks good right now Shadow. 547 (talk) 19:37, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 2025

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Draft:Siege of Bamyan (1221). This includes making page moves while a discussion remains underway. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. If the article has failed AFC twice then it's not ready to be moved to mainspace. Please don't move it again, thanks. Blue Sonnet (talk) 15:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Siege of Bamyan (1221) (February 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Qcne was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Lots of promotional, casual language.

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:Siege of Bamyan (1221) 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

qcne (talk) 20:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hello Shadow. 547! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Mongol Empire, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:27, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Siege of Bamyan has been accepted

Siege of Bamyan, 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. 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 help desk. 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

qcne (talk) 20:26, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Draft:Sack of Suzdal

If this was the first article that you created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:Sack of Suzdal, was deleted as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:51, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hey so i FORGOT to remove the "test" text and i was gonna work on it time by time so thats why i created it Shadow. 547 (talk) 18:59, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Siege of Bamyan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hazara.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:58, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mongolia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mongolian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2025

Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. At least one of your edits on the page Golden Horde, while it may have been in good faith, was difficult to distinguish from vandalism. To help other editors understand the reason for the changes, you can use an edit summary for your contributions. You can also take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:44, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do not edit quotes to insert links to articles. Quotes should never be altered. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:45, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And do bother to look up what a WP:REDIRECT is before you nominate them for deletion? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:48, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you are creating redirects for the sole purpose of adding them into categories, please stop and look at WP:RCAT: "Redirects are not usually sorted to article categories". A reminder: categories are to help readers navigate between actual articles. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:01, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Siege of Bamyan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Timurid.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding "lifespan" to infoboxes

Can you please stop adding the duration in years to historical state infoboxes? You can clearly see that this is not standard practice, and it's disruptive for you to then edit-war on this as you did at Mongol Empire. Readers can do the math themselves if they want, otherwise it's unnecessary clutter and a distraction from the more substantive chronological information. If you disagree, start a talk page discussion on this on the relevant article(s). R Prazeres (talk) 19:11, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of wars involving Mongolia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ainu.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:58, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New message to Shadow. 547

Please see WP:NOTBROKEN. Remsense ‥ 论 21:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

K Shadow. 547 (talk) 22:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Template:Did you know nominations/Mongol siege of Kaifeng (1232). 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. Thank you. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:44, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.Cinderella157 (talk) 00:09, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

im on vacation and il look into it later on when im back Shadow. 547 (talk) 10:50, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:22, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you assume ownership of articles again, as you did at Siege of Bamyan, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:27, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 alr fine and also why did u block me from discord? Shadow. 547 (talk) 18:34, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Nicopolis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kingdom of Croatia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Liberation of Khovd

Hello, Shadow. 547. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Liberation of Khovd, 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) 23:07, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah i dont care about liberation of khovd that was ai💀 Shadow. 547 (talk) 08:57, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jamie's Got Tentacles

Hello Shadow. 547,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Jamie's Got Tentacles for deletion, because it's a redirect from an article title to a namespace that's not for articles.

If you don't want Jamie's Got Tentacles to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:20, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh does this affect my other draft article that im working on and if i move it to an Article will it work? Shadow. 547 (talk) 14:24, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Editing others’ comments

You seem to get hyperfixated on things you find annoying, and then proceeding to change every instance you can find. First it was Bamyan vs. Bamiyan, for which you moved archived DYK nominations, edited several-year-old GA reviews, and much else. Now it seems you love adding invisible borders to images, doing nothing but clutter up editors’ watchlists, and now editing other comments. Please stop: you are being a WP:TIMESINK, and I am very close to requesting that an admin ban you from editing infoboxes. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:46, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More useless time-wasting. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 I wanna know how is it time wasting because im literally fixing the links theres no article called the Mongol conquest of the Khwarazmian Empire only Mongol invasion of the Khwarazmian Empire Shadow. 547 (talk) 19:13, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are not fixing anything. For all the time you've spent fiddling about with redirects, you clearly still haven't read the page about them. Guess what? They have a purpose. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Liberation of Khovd

Hello, Shadow. 547. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Liberation of Khovd".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions here. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 22:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I dont work on it anymore so yeah you guy’s can delete it Shadow. 547 (talk) 11:53, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to Mongol invasion of Europe did not have an edit summary. Collaboration among editors is fundamental to Wikipedia, and every edit should be explained by a clear edit summary, or by discussion on the Talk page. Please use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to describe what it changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. When logged in to your Wikipedia account, you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:27, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Battles involving the Mongols has been nominated for discussion

Category:Battles involving the Mongols has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:52, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Battle of Caucasus Mountain

Hello, Shadow. 547. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Battle of Caucasus Mountain, 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) 17:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Siege of Nishapur

Hello, Shadow. 547. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Siege of Nishapur, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 17:07, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Islam in Mongolia

Hi bro I see you your contribution on Wikipedia project Mongolia, Can you help me to improve Ulgii Central Mosque, English articles are full of misinformation much about it, and I do not know Mongolian language, I try to add some sources by using Google web translator. Can you please improve it by providing some Historical context of it??

Thanks for attention 獅眠洞 (talk) 10:52, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@獅眠洞I kinda stopped working on wikipedia articles because i just dont feel like it anymore but il think about it Shadow. 547 (talk) 10:53, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reply 獅眠洞 (talk) 10:56, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome Shadow. 547 (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Siege of Nishapur (1221)

Hello, Shadow. 547,

Thank you for creating Siege of Nishapur (1221).

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

Please add WP:RELIABLE references to unsourced sections in the article.

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|Agent VII}}. 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.

Agent 007 (talk) 17:35, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October 2025

Please do not assume ownership of articles as you did at Siege of Nishapur (1221). If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:11, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 I dont but ok + stop messing with the article it’s fine as it is Shadow. 547 (talk) 17:38, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you assume ownership of articles, as you did at Siege of Nishapur (1221). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:25, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for contravening Wikipedia's policy against harassment. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~Lofty abyss 21:15, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Siege of Nishapur (1221) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Siege of Nishapur (1221) 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/Siege of Nishapur (1221) 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.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:39, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]