User talk:Kheyre229

Kheyre229, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Kheyre229! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like MrClog (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

October 2019

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Gedo, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:43, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Beledweyne. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:45, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Hassan Sheikh Mohamud. Thank you. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:48, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Somali Airlines. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Jetstreamer ^Talk 13:52, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Socotra. 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 notice boards.
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. Thank you. SharabSalam (talk) 00:10, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. SharabSalam (talk) 10:47, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mataban District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hiran (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 11:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Ahmed Duale Gelle—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Serols (talk) 11:59, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Galmudug, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Federal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:16, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

Your recent editing history at Mataban District shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. –eggofreason^{(talk · contribs)} 23:29, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Abdi Ware moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Mohamed Abdi Ware, does not have enough sources and citations 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. Minorax (talk) 06:12, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for continued disruption, disregard for WP:V policy, refusal to discuss. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 18:12, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

Kheyre229 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have references for my articles I have edited. I feel like I have been unfairly targeted. I have learnt my lesson and even if it’s a minor edit I will add references. Kheyre229 (talk) 21:16, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Hi Kheyre229. As mentioned by SQL below, these edits have been disruptive. You currently deny this. However, the block does appear to have been necessary to prevent disruption. There are two options: 1) Wait until the block expires, and don't make the mistakes again. 2) Appeal the block. If you choose to appeal the block, you must convince the reviewing administrator that you fully understand the reason for the block, and that such disruption will not happen again. The current unblock request is not convincing. It is too unspecific: What did you do wrong, why did you do it, and can we really trust you not to make the same mistakes again? Which edits would you like to make when unblocked? Please provide specific examples: Which edit would you like to make to which page? Thank you and best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:06, 16 April 2020 (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.

I think there is more to the block than just references. Edits like this one for instance. Instead of edit warring (reverting back repeatedly), you should be discussing with the other editor when your edits are removed. SQL ^{Query me!} 07:19, 14 April 2020 (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).

Kheyre229 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand, If you go and look at the discussion i have discussed it with user Ayanl3. I was just changing it back to what we agreed on. - SQL Kheyre229 (talk) 07:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline as you cannot have two of these requests open at once. Daniel Case (talk) 21:31, 14 April 2020 (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.

Ahmed Abdi Kariye moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Ahmed Abdi Kariye, does not have enough sources and citations 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. Mccapra (talk) 19:02, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]