User talk:Rayooni

Welcome!

Hello, Rayooni, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. EvergreenFir (talk) 14:41, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

Hello, I'm Laplorfill. An edit that you recently made to Khnata bent Bakkar seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Laplorfill (talk) 05:20, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ma'luf, 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. M.Bitton (talk) 00:01, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Cheikh Bouamama, you may be blocked from editing. M.Bitton (talk) 23:39, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at History of Western Sahara. M.Bitton (talk) 20:33, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Barbary Wars, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. M.Bitton (talk) 22:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. 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 ~~~~}}. EvergreenFir (talk) 14:39, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at African Nations Championship, you may be blocked from editing. M.Bitton (talk) 22:39, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Battle of Wadi al-Laban. M.Bitton (talk) 16:26, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. 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 ~~~~}}. ~TNT (she/her • talk) 13:55, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of wars involving Morocco. 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) 14:54, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing, IP socking and edit warring after a the previous block expired

As well as edit warring after your month long block barely expired, you've also been IP socking to disrupt various article (I have a list of some of them). I suggest you refrain from further disruption if you son't want to be reported to the admins. M.Bitton (talk) 15:00, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Plastering my talk page with your nonsense (including personal attacks) won't make any difference. M.Bitton (talk) 15:19, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Widr (talk) 15:55, 17 September 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

so, i have been blocked for adding information that was correct helping improve the article, but apparently there is always this one person M.Bitton removing my addings which are 100% correct Rayooni (talk) 16:49, 17 September 2021 (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. MER-C 16:53, 17 September 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here Rayooni (talk) 17:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC) i understand what I’ve been doing wrong and will no longer add unnecessary information instead make useful contributions[reply]

Decline reason:

You need to do more than just paraphrase your last decline. You need to explain what you have done wrong and say what topics you want to edit, if unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 17:22, 17 September 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here Rayooni (talk) 17:32, 17 September 2021 (UTC) i will be totally honest what i have done wrong was go in a edit war which is totally unexceptable. All i want to do is improve Wikipedia. And im looking forward in order expanding and adding valuable information about the wars participated by morocco, history and politics of morocco and football in africa[reply]

Decline reason:

I was originally going to decline on the basis of not covering the significant warn/block reason above of unsourced edits. I would now want you to cover the nature of these personal attacks - I'm inclined to think that they're you, but would give a chance to respond for future block appeals. Nosebagbear (talk) 16:45, 25 September 2021 (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.

Given your history of disruptive editing (adding OR and removing sourced content that you don't like), IP socking that has been going on for months (did you really think nobody would notice?) and personal attacks (that you are yet to even acknowledge), I find it impossible to believe you. M.Bitton (talk) 17:36, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t understand how i add something that belongs to the history of Morocco but u still manage to remove it when is 100% true, i know you removed it because you come from a different background that the reason for removal. Personal attacks what kind of attacks the one i said removing correct information is an attack. Fine if you don’t want me to add anything just tell me and how about you do background check and help improving the wars involving morocco rather than deleting it. Rayooni (talk) 17:55, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These personal attacks[1][2] (that I didn't even bother reporting). Keep pretending you don't understand while casting aspersions. Your response confirms what I said. M.Bitton (talk) 18:53, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You want to report me, fine go ahead ur acting like the world is gonna end, go ahead block me cuz im just tired of dealing with people like you, wasting my time trying to improve articles and ur deleting them because you are too tired too check for yourself, go ahead ban me you think i will die😂 Rayooni (talk) 19:09, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Im trying to improve Moroccan articles and then ur always deleting it, it is always you M.Bitton no one else they all see it fine but only you have a problem with it, doesn’t that look a bit suspicious? Rayooni (talk) 19:11, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Ali al-araj ibn ismail

Hello, Rayooni. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ali al-araj ibn ismail, 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) 17:02, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Ali al-araj ibn ismail

Hello, Rayooni. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Ali al-araj ibn ismail".

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. If 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!} 19:12, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rayooni. 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) 19:53, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]