Hello, I'm Sven Manguard. I noticed that you made a change to an article, 2013 Egyptian coup d'état, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Facebook is not a reliable third party source, and should not be used as a reference, especially in polarizing, contentious articles. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:11, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the source is an ""'official'"" statement of an ""'official'"" page.

Huggle did not show the content as being moved, so it looked like it was being replaced. Apologies. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:35, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

never mind :)Amrtarek (talk) 05:45, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Ruby Murray. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Abdel Fattah el-Sisi without thoroughly explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Ruby Murray 05:50, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am Mohamed Hassan. I have just reverted your edits to Abdel Fattah el-Sisi page as you have removed referenced and relevant information. Please try to edit within the Wikipedia neutral philosophy. I have also re-added referenced information you have removed from 2013 Egyptian coup d'état, which might have been due to new findings. However and again please try to keep an unbiased status.

Amr, first of all i would like to thank you for your contributions on improving articles related to the Egyptian military.

1. Before the article grabs the attention of other users, i just wanted to ask you to stick to a more neutral language and keep your love for the military aside for now while editing.
2. Better sources should be used because blogs and sites like "Listen To the Red Shaman And Friends" are unreliable sources. The numbers were extremely huge yes, but no current reliable sources confirm the 33 million protesters. I've looked all over the internet for it and all i found was sources referring to one military source. And by the way, the number does sound too big in my opinion. Just say "according to a military source" to prevent future edit wars with pro-MB users who will later start to edit. The more edit conflicts, the more the article's credibility is undermined and we want to create the best article there is. There are also no proper sources saying the demonstrations were the largest in history and the ones that do always refer to a tweet by Sawiris.
3. Another thing i noticed in your edits is the capitalization of words in the middle of phrases like this: The Egyptian Armed Forces has it's influence on the Politics in Egypt, Egyptian Economy and it exempts itself from laws that apply to other sectors. as The Armed Forces enjoy considerable power, prestige and independence within the Egyptian state. You also used such capitalized words in this latest article before David O. Johnson corrected them. I know those are just minor mistakes but could you please pay more attention? I mean no disrespect but such phrasing can be considered disruptive by many people.

Finally, i'm optimistic about your role in this article and i hope the best comes out of your contributions because this will be a very controversial article in the future. Cheers! Fitzcarmalan (talk) 10:32, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, don't worry I truly understand. and about mil love believe me am just trying to keep it closer to reality not biasing. I am anyway new to Wikipedia, but I promise to keep these notices in my mind. Regards. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 18:57, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and i hope you don't take anything i said as an offense. We're just helping each other. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 20:22, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Worry, No Hate :) Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 22:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tarek, i noticed recently that you are changing the article about the Egyptian coup, please refer to the rules of Wikipedia before changing. modified information are under great threat of Wikipedia credibility — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hans Franssen (talk • contribs) 23:15, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is just a revision --Panam2014 (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's something discussed before, if you have a problem with that you can discuss again in it's page you are not free to change everything without discussion. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 23:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the last speech Adly Mansour. He said constitutional amendment in 2012 not a new constitution. This is an amendment in 1980 as the constiution 1971--Panam2014 (talk) 23:49, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

1971's wasn't changed but some articles were modified by President Sadat as example, but this time it was mostly changed "with new elections", that didn't happen to 1971's. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 23:54, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, there was a referendum in 1980 to change the constitution of 1971. 2014 is not new it is still called 2012 constitution --Panam2014 (talk) 23:56, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

all governmental websites say "amending/modifying", both means changing. it was described as [new one] by the [Chairman of the committee] who wrote it also. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 00:04, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

amending/changing=/= new constitution. In 1980, it was also an amending. --Panam2014 (talk) 00:06, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No believe me, modify is to change for the better + I guess the chairman of the committee which wrote It knows more than us. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 00:10, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why in the draft constitution it says 2012 constitution ? And the President of the Republic knows more — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panam2014 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a new constitution. Or vous can create the 1980 constitution --Panam2014 (talk) 00:20, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because they just didn't start from point zero, the State information Service says the new constitution. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 00:24, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source ??? --Panam2014 (talk) 00:25, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[مصر تكتب دستورًا جديدًا] [مشروع دستور مصر الجديد فى الصحافة المصرية] Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 00:27, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the source and thank you to the source article. Why Adli Mansour spoke to amend the constitution of 2012, but no amendment? --Panam2014 (talk) 00:37, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The new constitution, that's how Mansour described it Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 13:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qed237. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living person on Mohamed Salah, but that you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. QED237 (talk) 00:27, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Hans Franssen. Hi Amr, The article of Egyptian coup is under great confusion with other versions of wikipedia, Can you stop editing till a decision is reached about the merging. by merging form now with some contents from other articles, will introduce great mess to other readers. Thanks

It isn't merged that how it is before merging proposal. don't change anything until discussion is ended in it's talk page. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 23:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

can you check the other version such as the french and dutch ones, the english version is under great confusion and mess, do not impose your personal views and believes on Wikipedia please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hans Franssen (talk • contribs) 23:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That isn't my pov, not me who wrote all that. people co-operated to write this you can't just remove everything without discussion. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 23:32, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

still the fact of confusion with other versions is there, removing the wrong data is allowed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hans Franssen (talk • contribs) 23:36, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

allowed after discussion, you aren't just free to remove everything because you see it as "confusion". Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 23:39, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

there must be a consistency in the data provided by Wikipedia mutiple versions — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hans Franssen (talk • contribs) 23:45, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Amr, I visited the Arabic version and tried to translate it with Google translate, i noticed that there is a rally on the discussion page for political biasing, it is clear by multiple political institutions in the west that it was a coup, imposing the same rally on the english version is making mis-credibility for the page, stop reverting it with wrong information please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hans Franssen (talk • contribs) 23:51, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mohamed Morsi may have broken the syntax by modifying 4 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:35, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, can you make a Adly Mansour photo ? --Panam2014 (talk) 07:31, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have already looked for any free to use picture of him, but unfortunately I haven't find any. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 16:59, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you take the photo in the presidential palace or negociate to have a photo? --Panam2014 (talk) 18:22, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to find any photographer who already captured a picture of him. but unfortunately am not fiding any. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 20:32, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Still Looking? You ask that? Contact the Presidency--Panam2014 (talk) 16:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)--Panam2014 (talk) 16:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I contacted a Reuters' photographer but still didn't get a reply, if you have the presidency's mail can you give it to me? Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 01:07, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't mind but i removed your picture that was in the infobox and added it in the article itself because i'm planning on creating a montage for the protests (though i'm not yet sure how to do so). The infobox needs to show the huge masses at Tahrir, Ittihadiya, Alexandria and even the demos at Raba'a and perhaps also the storming of the MB's headquarters. Those events are more significant than a woman holding a red card, don't you think?. Maybe you can help me out with that while you can. Thanks. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 01:52, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah for sure. I put it because it was the only picture I had found. can you find more pictures? Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 09:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, i'm not very familiar with Wikipedia's image use policy to be honest and the photos i recently uploaded were from Flickr like yours. I've also never contacted authors of copyrighted pictures before. I will try but it would be great if you helped. These are links of pictures i found useful and informative but i don't know how to get them:

• Alexandria
• Ittihadiya (1) (2)
• Tahrir
• Muslim Brotherhood HQ storming (1) (2)

Any 2 photos would do fine since one can be used for the proposed montage and one in the article itself. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 19:31, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will contact them and see if they will agree. Amr Tarek^{Say Hello!}, 21:04, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, i will also try looking for more stuff to add. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 21:14, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The two pictures i uploaded were deleted. I am currently looking for any good photos with those laser helicopters that were patrolling the protests as i believe it would be a nice-looking addition. You can help too if you want. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 21:13, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Egyptian Revolution of 2013 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/Egyptian Revolution of 2013 until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.GreyShark (dibra) 19:02, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Egypt–Ethiopia relations, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:59, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. 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.
It takes two to edit war - WP:3RR and WP:BRD swing both ways. Whether it's under discussion or not, this isn't obvious vandalism and is subject to 3RR. --ElHef (Meep?) 14:07, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amrtarek, i have reverted the deletion that you did on the Article of Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Can you stop the edit war? and discuss first. Thanks Andri Kuawko (talk) 17:30, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]