So?
So? try to explain what Chuck could not manage to do. --
I trust Chuck, so I figure if he is reverting you, he must have a good reason. That said, your name identifies you as a potential pan-Turkicist or pan-Altaicist, which rings alarm bells right away. I'll let Chuck do the explaining.
Ok, do so please. But I think I will report you for insulting me with unfounded racist comments. --
I reverted you at Марий Эл because your "etymology" of a Mari term consisted of telling what some source said was its translation- three sources to back up basically nothing.
At Ural, you randomly interspersed a bunch of different bits of information into the etymology, referenced with: a reference to a blank page that required a non-functioning link to Google Books and a link to Cambridge University Press to document it, several references to an on-line survival encyclopedia, links to Wikipedia articles, including one that doesn't exist, a reference to some newspaper I've never heard of, and a link to a Books so that readers can verify that the referenced sentence is a plagiarism and a copyright violation. The end result is a mangled mess that includes two copies of the original etymology, doesn't make sense as a whole, and doesn't begin to meet Wiktionary's formatting requirements.
As for Tibet, please see my query at the Etymology scriptorium.
On the whole, you keep adding the same substandard, semi-random crap to etymologies and assume that it's being reverted only because we can't handle the truth. It's true that I have serious doubts about your content, but mostly I don't want to see you making an unreadable mess out of our etymologies.
"But I think I will report you for insulting me with unfounded racist comments"
- "Pan-Turkicist" and "Pan-Altaicist" are not races, so your comment is itself insulting and unfounded. I have no problems with the etymologies added by a number of Turkish editors here, and I see clearly non-Turkish names on some of the fringe literature that's been posted by Pan-Turkists.