User talk:Jalghoula

December 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Harissa. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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 and 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. M.Bitton (talk) 14:53, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Harissa. 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. No consensus reached. When you wrote "I'm in favour of an impartial arbitration",[1] you seemed to understand that that would be a valid next step. Well, pursue that step. See Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. An RFC might be worthwhile. Largoplazo (talk) 12:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk) 14:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Sphilbrick Thanks for your help. I edited the change and reduced it to a minor and generic history information that does not infringe any copyright clauses. Thanks. Jalghoula (talk) 18:29, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. S Philbrick (Talk) 18:39, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cite reliable sources

As a follow-up to the discussion with Sphilbrick above: please make a habit of always citing reliable sources for any significant content you add to articles, so that it conforms with Wikipedia's core policy of Verifiability. I've tagged the section you added at Hafsid dynasty as unsourced; I encourage you to take this opportunity to add citations to reliable sources there. Even if the information is "generic", it's information that the average Wikipedia reader wouldn't know on their own, so it needs to be attributed to reliable sources. I think it should be easy enough to find sources in this particular case. You may be able to find some by searching through Google Books, or you could, while being careful, look at well-sourced material in articles with closely related topics (e.g. University of Ez-Zitouna) to see if some of the sources there would help. If helpful, you can find further guidelines or advice at some of Wikipedia's instruction articles, like Help:Referencing for beginners.

A few extra things to also keep in mind: when you find a relevant source to cite, please also make sure that all the significant details of what you write are indeed supported by the source, so as to avoid adding your own original research. If the sources you find don't support a part of what you wrote, you should remove that part. Make sure you also present information in a neutral, encyclopedic tone, especially if the topic you're editing is controversial (see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view). Lastly, you can always leave a note or a question on the article's talk page if there's content you want to improve but you're not sure how to do it.

I hope some of this helps you going forward. Happy editing, R Prazeres (talk) 19:12, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Avionav moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Avionav, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. FishandChipper 🐟🍟 15:29, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Avionav

Hello, Jalghoula. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Avionav, 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) 16:01, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Avionav

Hello, Jalghoula. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Avionav".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:38, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

Hi Jalghoula! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 14:31, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any part of the above message that you still don't understand? M.Bitton (talk) 15:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Hafsid architecture, you may be blocked from editing. You have received multiple warnings previously and your edits still do not appear to be constructive. You are also continuing to incorrectly mark your edits as "minor" despite being clearly advised above to stop doing this. R Prazeres (talk) 20:10, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia. R Prazeres (talk) 19:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Jalghoula persistent unsourced edits. Thank you. R Prazeres (talk) 20:38, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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) 01:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]