User talk:Omar-Toons: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:02, 7 July 2010

Hi!

we need to talk. any reason why u do not want ahmed belbachir here even if it is properly cited?

About Morocco, I use your own source of information and more, if you think some part its incorrect, you can put it and why?, ok?

Later I put it alot of references in each part of this.

Bokpasa 13:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit-warring on History of Morocco

Please stop I am posting the same message on User talk:Bokpasa and User talk:Omar-Toons. You both need to stop edit-warring and accusing one another of vandalism. If you need a third party to mediate, I suggest that you read WP:MEDIATE. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:27, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring again If Bokpasa is doing something untoward, you can report him at WP:AN. I don't want to get in the middle of this dispute, but I will report both of you to WP:AN/3RR if this persists and then an admin can sort it out from there, but there is no need to get to that point. As far as I can tell, neither of you is vandalizing the page and throwing around those kinds of accusations is not constructive. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your 3RR report

Hi. There is a special board, WP:ANEW, for 3RR and edit-warring reports, and I have moved your report there. It's now at WP:ANEW#User:Bokpasa reported by Omar-Toons (talk) (Result: ). Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:35, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History of Morocco

Hello, Thank you for protecting the article History of Morocco. However, I have another request: Can you please lock it on the version that was online [1] before the editwar started [2]? As you can see on the discussion page[3], this is not happening for the first time, but always involving the same user. The maps on the article are original research and non-sourced and they contain false information example. The given information is also non-sourced and in contradiction with all the sources and references (see [4]). I'm just asking you to lock the article on the less untrue version. Regards, Omar-Toons (talk) 14:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If a page is protected due to a content dispute, it is customary to protect the version that is currently on top, unless this version contains vandalism, copyright infringements or violations of the BLP policy (See Wikipedia:Protect#Content_disputes). Since this version seems to contain neither i am reluctant to switch the top version. Remember, protection a certain version is not an endorsement of that version, but rather a necessity to stop the edit war.

I advice starting a discussion on the talk page to form consensus on the topics you mentioned, including the usage of those maps in general. If i have a section showing clear consensus i can act upon that basis once a user enters an edit war that does not comply with that consensus. If a user refuses to comment on the talk page and continues his reverting behavior that is considered to be disruptive, which in itself is a reason for a (temporally) block. Try to work something out in the three days the article will be locked and remember - the protection lasts three days, consensus lasts a lot longer - So don't worry about the top version. If you cannot find consensus yourself i would point to DR for some assistance with it. Good luck! Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Western Sahara

Hi Omar, even if your movement might be sensible in some way, you'd better discuss it before doing such an extreme movement. I understand that we have to be bold, but your edition may be seen as POV as the one you supposedly wanted to remove. Best regards --Ecemaml (talk) 22:07, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I don't personally have a strong opinion (well, in fact a wikiproject on Western Sahara seems fine to me... but tying it to the Polisario claim is obviously POV). Best regards --Ecemaml (talk) 22:33, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ESH

Please see WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle (BRD). You made a bold edit, it was reverted, and now is the time for discussion, not edit-warring. Make your case on the talk page, or start an RfC if you want, but you do not have consensus right now for your edit. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re: United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories

Well, on one hand, I just tried to use different wording to make the paragraph better. On the other hand, the very concept of military occupation is more related to a regular Army and a regular State. That's not the case (even if they wish) of the Polisario and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. That was my only rationale. Best regards --Ecemaml (talk) 17:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bokpasa at commons

Hi Omar, give me some time (even in Spanish, the speech by Bokpasa is awful). --Ecemaml (talk) 22:05, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here you have it (more or less, as I told you, his Spanish is also awful):

Hi! I don't know what you mean about me uploading false maps with wrong information (with low historical quality). If you want to locate such cities, don't write "Morocco", as it didn't exist in that date, and include other cities. The article was written by you and in other page you deny [the existence of] the other Republic... If you keep on including false maps, I'll raise a report to the administrators. You don't like to suffer what you do to other people, do you? Thank you!

Hope it helps. Best regards --Ecemaml (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. On the other hand, may I suggest you to open a deletion request for the two article on the saadite kingdoms? Bokpasa has been unable to provide any reliable source yet, so I think it's time to follow the procedure. See you --Ecemaml (talk) 10:19, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why didn't you add new figures instead of erasing mine?

So, if you know that the article on Berber people in Frecnch has "better" sources than Joshua Project; why don't you add the new figures shown in those sources, instead of just erasing the ones I added? It's easier to destroy than to construct, did you know? --Pablozeta (talk) 14:48, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Restored bibliography on Ahmed Belbachir Haskouri

That sounds like a good plan. I had already done the Bibliography formatting work, that's why I put it back after your work removing stuff. -Colfer2 (talk) 14:04, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]