User talk:Dullygust

Incorrect markup[edit]

Text between equals signs, == Like this == is for making brief section headings. It is not for putting extended text into a large font. Please reduce all your long section headings on Talk:Yom Kippur War to several words, or remove them. Otherwise I will need to remove everything you added. Zero^talk 02:45, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please I don't want more than neutrality I don't want more than justice Dullygust (talk) 02:49, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Already stopped Dullygust (talk) 02:50, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I understand Dullygust (talk) 02:55, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please reduce all your huge section headings to headings that fit on one line. Zero^talk 06:06, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Know and implement Dullygust (talk) 06:10, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am Egyptian and in fact I am in a state of great shock. I checked the article of the Six Day War, the War of Attrition and the October War, bias and big lies. It is really very painful and difficult to bear. Dullygust (talk) 06:12, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know that the magnitude of the bias has reached the point of fabricating lies in a war article for the six days, a false claim that the six marine commandos of Israel drowned an Egyptian minesweeper before their capture, this false claim. It was not mentioned in his book, Bani Morris, in his book The Righteous Victims, nor in the report on the history of Chattet 13, which claims to be credible and transparent, nor in General Danny Asher’s book on the Egyptian strategy for the Yom Kippur War, nor in any book that the editor has reached to this degree, how Egyptians expect him to be neutral. Dullygust (talk) 06:29, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He must understand our feelings that our country Egypt is being distorted. Where are the professionalism, impartiality, the consciences of the editors and other values in what the encyclopedia states? Dullygust (talk) 06:32, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have I scaled it down correctly and will they see all the details Dullygust (talk) 06:55, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yourself: If we were in a position of weakness, would I have issued this order two days after the ceasefire with all its possibilities? It was an undeclared war of attrition on our part, which was sufficed with the declarations of the enemy and the reports of the United Nations. The objectives of this undeclared war of attrition were: - To cause the enemy the greatest losses in its human forces, equipment and weapons, and to make it impossible to put it in the pocket as it continues to mobilize the reserves, which the enemy cannot bear for a long time. 208 - Not enabling him to set his feet by destroying his engineering equipment and equipment that appear in the area. Acquisition of more land in the east and west. The following statement can clarify the extent of the activity of our armed forces in the period from 10/31/1973 to 1/1/1974, that is, the day of the signing of the Separation of Forces Agreement. We have carried out, according to enemy data, 439 operations, including 3 9 in November 73, 213 in December 3 7, 3 13 in January 1974. These operations, according to the reports of the International Monitoring Authority and the reports of the Israeli forces themselves, resulted in the following losses Enemy: 11 aircraft. 41 tanks and armored vehicles. 10 heavy machine guns. 36 “bulldozer” and engineering equipment and vehicles. The Israeli oil tanker (Serena) was hit. Sinking a sea landing boat. Killed 7 18 people of the enemy. In addition to the number of wounded, which can be estimated times the loss of life. The reader may conclude that the losses are many times that, if these are the statements of the enemy. I assure you, and before I go into explaining the planning of the operation to liquidate the enclave, that the 7th and 19th Infantry Divisions of the Third Army (Badr Forces) located east of J 1072/10 (30, Field Marshal of the Canal and Suez City, had all their needs of ammunition, fuel, water and assignments). Which allows them not only to withstand, but also to participate in the attack that was decreed, and the supply of these two divisions continued by various means even before the supervision of the United Nations on this supply. Its narrow neck (only 6 kilometers) and its size that resembles a "bottle" so that it can be cut, and that it was very far from its supply lines and supplies, and that our forces close to its supply and supply were outnumbered and numerous and surrounded on all sides. ** 209 ISL... Dullygust (talk) 07:04, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extract from the memoirs of General Ahmed Ismail. My family released her in 2013 Dullygust (talk) 07:05, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The War of Attrition article is massively biased, the October War article, and the Six Day War article contain many lies, such as the claim that Israel’s naval commandos drowned an Egyptian minesweeper before their capture. This false claim, not even the report on the history of Şattit 13, this false allegation as well, nor any Russian-Israeli source mentioning this false allegation deliberately.[edit]

— This is an example of an unacceptable section heading. It isn't permitted. I won't ask again, reduce all your section headings to one line or I will delete everything that you wrote on that page. Zero^talk 07:14, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I totally understood because Dullygust (talk) 07:18, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying the exact formula that I should have followed Dullygust (talk) 07:35, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:The Egyptian army per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/The Egyptian army. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:02, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Impossible I'm never him Dullygust (talk) 20:04, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was surprised by my accusation that I am an editor whom I do not know in Wikipedia. There is a great misunderstanding. Please check for accuracy Dullygust (talk) 20:07, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong, sir. You're totally wrong, I'm not him Dullygust (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

mr. The one you are looking for died two weeks ago in a car accident. His page on the Arabic Wikipedia is called the armies of history Dullygust (talk) 20:12, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The boy died. He was reassured that he would not be congratulated again because he died. Enter the Arabic Wikipedia, the page of the armies of history, if you want to be tortured by him. Dullygust (talk) 20:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You mean because I deleted it, I asked Mahmoud Ahmed Ali on the Arabic Wikipedia to delete it, and I didn't really know that this was what was going to happen. I'm not him, may God have mercy on him, he died Dullygust (talk) 20:16, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They asked me to delete it Dullygust (talk) 20:19, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the Arabic Wikipedia, he asked me to delete it because the boy had died two weeks ago in a traffic accident on the Cairo road, so he asked me to delete it Dullygust (talk) 20:27, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Roy Smith, I've been on the English Wikipedia for 17 days. In discussions I'm not the boy. The poor man who died, please. I want a solution to this because it is impossible. He asked me to delete it by Mahmoud Ahmed and the friends of the boy who were with him here. I never knew that he was behind this ambush, and then the boy, may God have mercy on him, was not stupid, assuming that he would remove a ban. The home page that you supervise. I realize there are responsible, wise editors who know this Dullygust (talk) 20:59, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a sock puppet and I do not have another account and I do not even know how to create another account and this is my only account in Wikipedia Wikipedia editors Wise admins please I want justice I do not even know how to create another page after ban Dullygust (talk) 21:01, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Roy Smith, who died, will never return. In this world, you have to accept this grievance. I was asked to delete this by his friends on the Arabic Wikipedia Dullygust (talk) 21:19, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Dullygust (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Dullygust (talk) 20:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See below. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:21, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Dullygust (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Dullygust (talk) 20:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

"Your reason here" is not a good reason to unblock you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:21, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

He died

I trust that you are a wise editor and you will understand me well. Please unblock me and there is also no good reason to ban me because I have never done anything wrong. In general, I fully understood the law here. Dullygust (talk) 00:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please use wisdom and pardon ability You also know that I have not done anything illegal in general The boy died in a traffic accident By and large you can watch me too Dullygust (talk) 00:36, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like to talk about someone who has passed away. Please don't force me to. Dullygust (talk) 00:40, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is far that I am not him, may God have mercy on him, and put him in peace. I have not done anything illegal either. I am sure you will understand that Dullygust (talk) 00:41, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Respected editor, I demand the lifting of the ban and my monitors, if necessary Dullygust (talk) 00:46, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked to delete it and I didn't really know that this was a huge mistake I'm sorry Dullygust (talk) 00:50, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please I trust you understand that. Anyway, I never meant that. I was really surprised by the repercussions of that. I'm sorry Dullygust (talk) 00:52, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't let me down I ask you to unblock me Dullygust (talk) 01:08, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Dullygust (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Dullygust (talk) 00:44, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. If you submit a zero-effort unblock request again, you will lose access to your talk page. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 03:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Mr. James, I understand the editor’s position, and I understand why he banned me. Yes, I made a mistake, and I promise that I will not repeat it again. I also pledge not to cause any harm or disturbance. I understand the position of the editor and I understand why he banned me. Rather, it was good faith, and I stress that I did not realize the consequences of this mistake, and I was surprised by the repercussions of that. Boy, I promise to make useful contributions. There is also a reason for lifting the ban. I really didn’t know the laws enough. Congratulations. It differs greatly from the Arabic Wikipedia. I understand the editor’s position. My intention was not to sabotage. . or sabotage. Dullygust (talk) 04:23, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I say discussion in serious discussions before any liberation to avoid war, liberation or sabotage Dullygust (talk) 04:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The ban is no longer necessary to understand the situation and I promise not to repeat it again. In fact, I hope for a response. I would like to point out that I am fluent in English, but sometimes with difficulty, I ask for forgiveness Dullygust (talk) 04:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Really, I am very sad. I never expected all of this. I understand all of your positions, and I also hope that you will understand my position Dullygust (talk) 04:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is this how the conditions are met, or do you still need more details? Dullygust (talk) 04:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I promise and promise not to cause any damage or disturbance, and I hope that you will agree to unblock me, and you can monitor me by the way if I show any disturbance. Dullygust (talk) 04:38, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you want to help me proof of that these are new details thank you I fully understand the editor's position and I understand and pledge to never cause any harm Dullygust (talk) 04:39, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

? Dullygust (talk) 04:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ت

Please, I explained in detail my position with my full understanding of the position of the editor and I pledged to implement my pledges. I read in the instructions that you do not ban those who object to the ban for the sake of ban, but because they did not understand the position of the editor and I fully understand his position and pledge to implement everything I pledged Dullygust (talk) 06:22, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I want to point out that I literally incurred hardship while writing this to meet the conditions. I tried as much as possible to meet your conditions and the conditions of the respected editors. Dullygust (talk) 06:24, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I put a lot of effort into writing it and formulating it because although I am fluent in English, it is not difficult for me at times lest I make an unintended mistake in the wording, add to that the weakness of the victory I have in my eyes. Thank you Dullygust (talk) 06:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am sending a message to the supervisor of canceling the ban. Believe me, I made a mistake, but it was as if he was effectively emotional, no more, and I did not realize that these were its consequences at all. Thank you Dullygust (talk) 06:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't refuse the ban request, it's my first time here Dullygust (talk) 06:33, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

==

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Dullygust (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Dullygust (talk) 06:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

One request open at a time, please. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

==

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Dullygust (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Dullygust (talk) 06:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

We are getting nowhere. I have revoked talk page access. PhilKnight (talk) 09:20, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.