User talk:Omar-toons/archive1

Hello,

You are on my talk page, please don't forget to sign your message by typing (~~~~).

Please, don't insert your comments in the middle of other users' ones, start a new section or add your message below other users' ones in an already existing section.

Thanks!

Omar

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

we need to talk. any reason why u do not want ahmed belbachir here even if it is properly cited? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaskouri (talk • contribs) 18:02, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Omar-toons. You have new messages at Chipmunkdavis's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just tell me if you're watching my page! :) Chipmunkdavis (talk) 15:41, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Omar-toons. You have new messages at Chipmunkdavis's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

(Berber people) Page

Omar-Toons, you have removed, other Berber names from the legend (Berber People Page) twice.

It is clear that all the Legend images are all Kabyles and Rifian ( The legend is not (neutral) or exact representation of all the Berbers of north-Africa

your are missing the Atlas Berbers of Morocco.

(Add some or any)

Ammouri Mbarek Fatima Tabaamrant Lhaj Belaid Usman (Ammouri Mbarek, Said Bijaaden, Tarik El-maarufi, Belaid el-Akkaf, Lyazid Qorfi, Said Butrufin) Ali Chouhad Rkia Demsir Omar Ait Ulahyan Najat Aatabou Fatima Tachtoukt Yuba Cherifa Mohamed Rouicha Saïda Titrit

If no one can Add a represenation of (Moroccan Atlas berbers, Middle-Atlas, High-Atlas and Little Atlas) then the Legend Image should be removed from page.

(Amezwaru (talk) 23:05, 19 August 2010 (UTC))

Hello,

As you can easily see it, the infobox (and specially the pictures it contains) doesn't make a difference between Riffians, Kabyles Tuaregs and so on, the article is about Berber people (in general), and the pictures are the ones of well known Berbers, that's all.

In addition, as you say it by yourself: It is a "legend" ((in French):Légende): That means that it refers to the pictures above, explaining what (or whom) each picture refers to, then adding names without pictures is absurd.

On the other hand, the people you are suggesting to add aren't notable. Maybe they are notable in a small scale, locally, but I don't think they have their place here. From your list, I only recognise two names (Rouicha and Ataabou), and they have (far) less notability than Khattabi or Idir, sorry to tell you that even if you are a fan of them.

You can add your list to the page List of Berbers.

Removing the infobox because of your considerations could be considered as vandalism.

Omar-Toons (talk) 23:34, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Omar,

Do you have a ref for your statement "These languages are considered as separate by the IRCAM (politically) and scholars (socio-linguistically)"? I added that to Atlas languages, but it was deleted as unreferenced.

(PS. I'm not watching this page, so please reply there or on my talk page.) — kwami (talk) 08:56, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Joshua Project

Hi, I was involved in an edit fight with a user User:Takabeg who uses the Joshua Project as a source on Turkish people. Can you help me by stating that Joshua Project is unreliable? Kavas (talk) 02:08, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, again! User:Takabeg stopped using this website as a source. However, it is still helpful if you share your idea about this website. Kavas (talk) 02:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Almoravids and Almohads

Omar-Toons, I started a real work on the dynasties before and after the Almoravid dynasty [5] and Almohad Caliphate [6], why have you done this: [7], [8] without any respect for the time I spent to organise the articles. I waited for an answer to my posts on the Talk Pages [9], [10], but you did not discuss. Whould you finally decide to discuss or cotinue your edit-wars ?--Morisco (talk) 21:59, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello,

As you can easily understand, en.WP doesn't work the same way than fr.WP, then what was decided there isn't applicable here.

A "real work"? Seriously, do you consider that and that a "real work"? You just removed a template and added an extensive succession list, which may be not precise, since it consider that the territory of each dynasty was divided at the time of its falling, but the reality is that each dynasty lost, at the end of its power, its territories the one after the other, and kept control over a little territory (which is located in Morocco), before getting power overtaken by its successor starting form the same territory (Morocco). The paragraphs "History" of each dynasty's page as well as the page "History of Morocco" explains everything.

Which kind of "answer" are you expecting on the discussions? Seriously, did you wrote any question? Did you ask for a discussion? You just shared your point of view with us [11]. You just said that you think that this template has no place on the article. No questions, no arguments. And how do you think people can read/find a question that you wrote somewhere in the middle of the discussion page [12]?

The "History of Morocco" template is available on many WP's (including English and French ones), all include the Almohads and the Almoravids, but you don't agree with that, in my opinion, since it doesn't match your POV!

Just to answer to a few questions:

- Where were located the "centers of power" (capitals) of these dynasties? In Morocco.

- From where did they start the conquest of other territories? From Morocco.

- Which was the last territory that they controlled while they were collapsing? Morocco.

- How came to power the dynasties who reigned after? By taking their places in Morocco (That also explains the succession tab on the infobox).

- They were originated from somewhere else? Then the US are no longer the same than before since the president is partially originated from somewhere else? Come on! Most European monarchies are ruled by dynasties that aren't of "local descent". Is that a reason to consider that the Bourbon dynasty isn't Spanish? Bonaparte conquered the Dutch, is that a reason to consider it as a European leader, and not a French one? The answer is NO. By the same way, the Almohad and Almoravid dynasties are Moroccan, and I don't see any reason to consider them otherwise.

I just gave you some examples. If you don't agree, try to convince the user who made these templates to remove the two dynasties, as well as the wikipedians who wrote these two articles, since including this template (along with the "History of Al-Andalus" one, but I don't understand why this one was removed) was accepted (then became a consensus between the users, since no one removed it or discussed its removing, and since the users who (tried to) discuss it weren't contributors) for more than 2 years.

I don't really care about the nationalistic feelings. WP is a collaborative Encyclopedia, not a forum to explain nationalistic feelings and to modify articles because of them.

Omar-Toons (talk) 22:46, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I will move the discussion towards the respective pages of each article to allow other contributors to join our discussion.--Morisco (talk) 16:25, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Mutliple Spellings of Tariq on Tariq ibn Ziyad

The different spelling of the name 'Tariq' are important to note, as there are multiple English spellings. At the start there are two spellings already - 'Tariq' and 'Taric', so why remove the others?

eg. The name Tariq can also be written as Tarique, Tarik or Tarek.

Either I'll reinsert them, or you can. Up to you.

tnaseem (talk) 08:46, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

per WP:NPOV on Western Sahara : The territory's CoA and Flag

Hello,

Since Western Sahara is a disputed territory, redirecting the two pages Flag of Western Sahara and Coat of arms of Western Sahara to the SADR's ones is clearly PoV. I'm sorry to tell you that I will revert any PoV edition on these articles, for both Morocco and Polisario oriented PoV.

Neither the Moroccan flag and coat of arms are WS's ones, neither are Polisario/SADR's ones ; this is the basis of Neutrality on an article related to a disputed territory.

Omar-Toons (talk) 17:48, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Again, the dispute is irrelevant, only naming conventions and disambiguation are relevant. When people check Wikipedia for the 'flag of Western Sahara' or the 'coat of arms of Western Sahara', they simply will not ever be looking for the flag or coat of arms of Morocco, ever, ever, ever. They'll search for 'flag of Morocco' and 'coat of arms of Morocco' for those, and will find them. When searching Wikipedia for the 'flag of Western Sahara' and the 'coat of arms of Western Sahara', a person will always, always, always be looking for the emblems associated with the POLISARIO. People also do not look up information on flags hoping for an outline of what is clearly more appropriate and already covered in other articles. There is no getting around it.

You can of course continue to attempt to change the redirects, but I encourage you to be aware that the following will be against any such action:

1. Wikipedia policy on article titles.
2. Wikipedia guidelines on disambiguation.
3. Seven years of status quo. (And 3.5 years, or 10.5 years collectively.)
4. Many others having tried and failed.
5. That you are Moroccan, and are indisputably biased from birth.

The last thing this wiki needs is yet another "article" by a Moroccan outlining who controls what in Western Sahara; we already have the articles Western Sahara, Morocco, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Legal status of Western Sahara, and likely a majority of articles created by anyone associated with Wikipedia:WikiProject Morocco and Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Sahara to cover that particular issue. Articles about flags can remain about flags.

¦ Reisio (talk) 22:33, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Flags and coats

Could the two of you please discuss this on one of the "public" talkpages rather than making this some spread-out private discussion? thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 21:29, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

RfC: X of Western Sahara

RfC on that NPOVN thing is here. Nightw 03:21, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

User:HCPUNXKID

Just my opinion but you should report this on the admin noticeboard, I see that editors have given him/her many chances now and there was even discussion on another editor's talk page with HCPUNXKID that if this continues he/she may be blocked. I am really an outside editor on this so I do not want to report this myself. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

• • Reply: If the user reverts again I will go ahead with it, I just want this disruptive edit warring to stop over this as it has been days now. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:08, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

There is also a discussion going in at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents under "Deletion of POV and Unbalanced tags without discussion". You can maybe explain the situation there too. TL565 (talk) 20:14, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

On the issue of the article 2010–2011 Sahrawi protests, you should report him at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring as he clearly violated the 3RR. TL565 (talk) 18:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

MENA protests Western Sahara/Morocco flagicon

Hi, you replied to me on Talk:2010-2011 Middle East and North Africa protests, about why Mohamed Lamine Ould Salek Ould Said Mahmoudi (the only victim of self immolation to not have a flag as listed on the page). I still have a question: if I add the Sahrawi flag alone to his section on the page (as he is from Smara in Western Sahara), will that be deleted too? Thanks, and please reply on my talk page. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 22:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Since it is the flag of the SADR, which is one of two claimants of the territory, yes it will be deleted because it will be considered as PoV. Same if you add the flag of Morocco.

There are two solutions that can be considered as NPoV: Letting the line without flag or adding the "hybrid" flag.

Omar-Toons (talk) 23:25, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I added a 20px hybrid flag, only because too me the line doesn't look right without a flag. Thanks buddy. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 00:15, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

User:HCPUNXKID revisited

Hello, this is to inform you that there is another discussion about this user at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding the 2010–2011 Sahrawi protests in which you were involved with. Thank you. TL565 (talk) 18:41, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Action of Dececmber 1669

Would you mind explaining your attempt to add a different flag in? Nothing in any source I can find indicates that the striped one is only an ensign, and replacing it with the Ottoman flag implies that Algiers used that flag, which does not currently appear to be supported by sources Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

On these articles I didn't make a major change, I just reverted the contributions of an user who changed the information on some articles to mark that Algeria was a kingdom, while the reality is that it was an Ottoman Vilayet from 1515 to 1830, then made some corrections on articles containing this information which is OR (imho).

The only source cited on the "Catalan type" flag page on commons relates it as the flag of the Karamanlis, and if we see the Regency of Algier's page on the same website we cfind:

In any case, except for the very elaborate personal standards, the flag in use in the country was the Ottoman flag. This flag waved over Algiers and along the coast and in the Turkish garrisons at Bejaia, Bordj Leahou, Constantine, Medea, Mliana, Mazouna, Mascara, and Tlemcen

Btw, the use of this "Catalan style" flag isn't supported by reliable sources as to have been used as a national flag.

note: The same user that I reverted was banned from Fr.Wiki for vandalism, PoV editing and edit warring :)

Thanks btw. :)

Regards.

Omar-Toons (talk) 20:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

It was actually I who added that flag when I expanded the article back in January, not an IP replacing the Ottoman flag with the striped flag. Although now I see that an IP has changed it back, while a separate IP has replaced it again with the Ottoman flag. (Would the second IP happen to be you, logged out?) There are really several points I'm trying to make here: one, that we don't even know if Ottoman Algiers used this flag (do we have a better source than FOTW? It's just someone's personal website - besides which, it gives a starting date later than the battle in question), while we do know that they used the striped one (or as I should say a striped one, since the picture is in black and white) because it's in pictures of the battle; and two, that while we might wikilink Regency of Algiers, it's probably inappropriate to put "Ottoman Empire" in the infobox because all of the sources refer to the opposing force as Algerine. (Unless you interpret "Turks" in the primary source as actually meaning "Turks" rather than a synonym for "Muslims.") I think that until we have confirmation from a reliable source that another flag was used, we should use the flag that appears in contemporary images of the battle, and our description of the opponent should reflect that used by the sources.

(Gosh, the edit war would have to break out right as it's up for GA, wouldn't it?)

--Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:37, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I saw that, the IP I'm talking about is making POV/OR edits on all articles related to Ottoman Algeria by marking that Algeria was an independent kingdom [13], while it was de jure part of the Ottoman empire and de facto controlled by the Turks (Ottomans) of the Odjak, that's why I added "Ottoman empire" to the infobox ; maybe it is more appropriate to put it between brackets?

About the flag, event the description os the Picture on Commons isn't precise. Btw, there are no sources that cite this flag as the one of the Regency, it can't be included based on a drawing, that can be considered as OR.

Omar-Toons (talk) 11:53, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

It would also be OR to say that that was the flag used by Algiers when absolutely nothing indicates that this was so. Again, even if the source you had given were authoritative, rather than the personal website of a non-expert, it gives 1671 as the starting date for the use of the flag, while the battle in question took place in 1669. Rather than edit warring, please take your concerns to a noticeboard or something (WP:NORN? WP:NPOVN if you really think it's a POV issue?). In the meantime, I am removing the flag, and also wikilinking "Regency of Algiers" but removing "Ottoman Empire" from the infobox, because that reflects the descriptions in sources. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:17, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I've posted at WP:NPOVN#Flag of Algiers in 1669. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

You?

Is User:Omar-toons you? Their userpage redirects to yours. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 11:51, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest leaving a note on your userpage then that it is a alternative account, before someone suspicious comes along! Chipmunkdavis (talk) 13:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Re:Sock puppetry case / vandalism on Ottoman/Algiers related articles

Hello, Omar-toons. You have new messages at Fastily's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-FASTILY ^(TALK) 19:48, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Looks like this has flared up again

Flag of Western Sahara. Nightw 05:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Berber revolt

hi

as you asked discussion, please take a look at this TP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dzlinker (talk • contribs) 13:28, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

RE: KAMTCHO

Hi. Might want to revert some of these =/ Nikthestoned 16:25, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Your edits to the article for Eugénie Buffet

Hello,

I noticed you made some changes to the article for Eugénie Buffet so as to clarify that she was born in French Algeria versus Algeria. Admittedly I know little of the history of Algeria and I had based the wording of Buffet's place of birth using the wording of the sources cited in the article's References section, which could very well have been inaccurate. I do however have a question:

I visited the current wiki article for French Algeria and it states: "French Algeria...lasted from 1830 to 1962, under a variety of governmental systems." Given that Eugénie Buffet was born in Tlemcen in 1866, would that not mean the country of her birth would have been Algeria, since the country was no longer under French colonial rule at the time?

I am also curious as to why we would need to change the phrase "Eugénie Buffet was an Algerian-born French singer" to simply "Eugénie Buffet was a French singer". She was indeed born in Algeria (or French Algeria, if you will), and perhaps I am misunderstanding the reason for the change in wording, but would it be incorrect to refer to someone born in Algeria—regardless of their race, ethnicity or family history—as "Algerian", or in the least "Algerian-born"?

Your comments on these matters would be greatly appreciated. I look forward to any clarification that you could provide.

Thanks Marchije•^speak/_peek 22:39, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

French Algeria (...) lasted from 1830 to 1962 (...) Eugénie Buffet was born in Tlemcen in 1866 -> 1830 < 1866 < 1962... simple notions of mathematics...

On the other hand, Algeria was part of France, not a colony nor a protectorate, people born in Algeria between 1830 and 1962 are considered as born in France, not in Algeria (even, people born in pre-1962 Algeria, they still have their 9A/9B/9C... French dept codes on their ID/CSS), since "Algeria" had no internationally recognized status at this time but was recognized as a part of the French territory.

This issue was discussed on many articles before, and it was used to put "French Algeria" instead of "Algeria".

Omar-Toons (talk) 04:24, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

ROTFL! How embarrassing! For some reason I was thinking it was from 1830 to 1862!!! Then forget everything I just said. I even read the article and it never donned on me that she was born in the 19th c and Algeria ended in the 20th. Man, I must have been tired when I read that! 8-P Marchije•^speak/_peek 22:14, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

maysara al-matghiri

hi! al haqir is an arabic word. no sources are necessary to prove that arabs where the ones who called the guy ignoble (حقير). i'm reintroducing this little precision — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dzlinker (talk • contribs) 15:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

you want a talk about an image on this article Augustine of Hippo

ok here it is, what's your problem? --Dzlinker (talk) 17:03, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Fossatum Africae

1. this article concerns the ancient roman province of africa, it's not about all the fortifications in all north africa during roman rule (not the same as the linked french article)
2. useless resources, they don't give any info about morocco fortifications durring the same period (if they do and i haven't found them, insert a citation into the reference block) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dzlinker (talk • contribs) 12:58, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

I suggest you to read the entire PDF file instead of removing content "because you didn't read the right paragraph". I added a link to the PDF file, which, you said, is a "useless/false" one (I didn't know that a document issued by the German gov. wasn't a reliable source!), and it cites explicitely the presence of part of the Fossatum Africae in Morocco (1st source, p.7) and also a second one citing Tunisia ; these documents are sources to the information cited in the article, and it was never used to "quote the entire paragraph" to justify an information.

Thanks to avoid edt-warring by PoV-motivated edits and WP:OWN.

Omar-Toons (talk) 15:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

i don't really got time, so i use the search engine of my pdf reader. and maroc gives no results.

the first point is more important this article doesn't concerne all north african fortifications as the french one (just Africa (Roman province)).

your undiscussed edits will be undone soon.

Dzlinker (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:06, 8 July 2011 (UTC).

Probably because the text is in English and that "Maroc" is a French word, not?

Probably because the articles cites explicitly that the Fossatum Africa stretches from Morocco to Tunisia, and that you just didn't read it, not?

Please read WP:OWN and WP:EW, your edits are WP:OR and are opposed to the information cited by reliable sources.

Omar-Toons (talk) 00:08, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

No

maroc and marocco don't give any thing, try to give a good source, or your edits ll we undone

Dzlinker (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:10, 9 July 2011 (UTC).

Maybe because in English it is called "Morocco", not "Marocco"... not?

Omar-Toons (talk) 13:54, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

no even moroco and morocco and ..

Dzlinker (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:08, 9 July 2011 (UTC).

Since you don't seem to have the intention to participate through a collaborative way, I added the complete quote. This is very bad since it proves that some users aren't able to find an information and that they are waiting for others to find it for them. Now it is well cited, I hope that you will understand that your accusations of "adding fake information" and of sources gambling will not be seen again.

Omar-Toons (talk) 14:05, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I hope that my update to this article has removed any need for this argument to continue. The reference to Trosset (1980) was very useful, thank you. But I don't find any need to cite the German PDF because it is very general and concerns the whole Roman "limes", it would be better in an article about the "limes". It is the "limes" that stretches from Morocco to Tunisia (and beyond) not any fossatum, which in any case does not necessarily follow the "limes". MisterCDE (talk) 05:22, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

moroco =? maghrib

al maghrīb =/= morroco which did not exist at the time.

the period the book was written morocco was called al maghrib al aqsa (the far maghreb) al maghrib referred to the all north west africa

Dzlinker (talk) 13:56, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I suppose that you got some sources to prove that? :)

Omar-Toons (talk) 14:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

A beer for you!

for this edit here Dzlinker (talk) 15:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

french every thing

french .. suggest it is always under french rule like French Polynesia, French Guiana, French Caribbean..

for the maghreb it is not the case. so stop defending your false useless point of view

those articles (especially biographic ones) are not about the history of the country where the guy is born

if you persist on your useless facts, put instead of french.. /then under french colonisation/

if you say algeria was part of france, it's the french point of view not the algerian

same thing for maroco and tunisia

Dzlinker (talk) 15:43, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

The last time i request a talk. Being the only one who want french Algeria, you should convince me, or at least bring an acceptable consensus.

Dzlinker (talk) 21:23, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

An other beer for you!

for those edits: here Dzlinker (talk) 20:38, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Warning

From an examination of your contribution history[14] it is clear that you are enaged in a numbre of edit-wars with at least 2 accounts within the last 3 weeks. Stop using the revert/undo function on the site to restore your preferred version of an article. Further revert-warring will result in this acount being blocked.
Please use the relevant article talk pages to avoid edit-wars and build consensus. Where disruptive edits are made DO NOT edit-war, rather ask for assitance at the relevant noticeboard, WP:NPOVN, WP:RSN, WP:COIN--Cailil ^talk 14:00, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Hello, You're doing a good job at keeping a watch over a wide range of Morocco related articles! Regards Tachfin (talk) 13:26, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

More sockage reverting your edits?

To make sure I'm seeing what I think I see, is Hamadi12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) another sock of the user you reported? I think I hear quacking, but I'd like a little confirmation (even if not independent) before I block that account. —C.Fred (talk) 15:28, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Wait, never mind. I think that confirmed it better than me asking could. —C.Fred (talk) 15:30, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Omar-toons. You have new messages at Drmies's talk page.
Message added 04:32, 8 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sorry I'm late, Omar--spent a week somewhere else, without internet. Drmies (talk) 04:32, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Omar-toons. You have new messages at Ioeth's talk page.
Message added 17:07, 8 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 17:07, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Western Sahara lists of positions

Hello,
Template:Western Sahara lists of positions is being considered for deletion. Your input would be appreciated at this template entry in the templates for discussions page.
Best regards Tachfin (talk) 17:17, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

History

Are you kidding me?

Indeed forget to write that Morocco invaded Moon and longtime there is a Moroccan colony. Luciusmaximus (talk) 23:42, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

• Are you write again when aliens conquest Morocco?Luciusmaximus (talk) 23:22, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Can you write sth using an "understandable" English, please?

Omar-Toons (talk) 02:23, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

cercando di capire non è difficile

i've seen the discussion on the "Algerian Almohads" it's an empty circle. as you can see in this template : {{history of Algeria}}
the menu contains the Almohads. so the template must be on the page. other wise the template is a dead end useless thing. capito - Dzlinker (talk) 17:20, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

Seriously, you can even add Zimbabwe on it and impose it on the page History of Zimbabwe, I don't care, but please avoid this kind of language!

Omar-Toons (talk) 17:46, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

XFD:Template:Political parties of Western Sahara

Hi,
As you contributed to Morocco and Western Sahara related articles, I think you might be interested in this discussion. Your input would be appreciated.

Regards --Tachfin (talk) 14:23, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

recall

plz proceed with this talk. this is a reminder, may be you didn't get the message on your wl

Dzlinker (talk) 17:43, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

New article: Tafia of Ceuta

Hello,

I'm contacting to request your help: Recently Bokpasa created an article (Taifa of Ceuta), it was speedily deleted but then somebody else came, found a reference to it in google books and recreated the article. Since I'm not an expert on Andalusian history, I wanted to ask you if a Taifa in Ceuta really existed? I've read in "History of Ibn Khaldun" that Ceuta, Tangiers, Malaga and Algeciras belonged to the same Taifa which was governed by the Hammudid dynasty.

Thank you for your help and have a nice day! Tachfin (talk) 14:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Template talk:Berber languages

Your last suggestion was: "Ok, then let's take Kossman's classification (2002) instead of reverting, arbitrary, everything!" I restored the original, closely based on Kossmann's (1999) classification, after giving you days to respond to my answer, and you decided to replace it (with no comment except a bare claim that this was "unscientific") with a classification that you previously attributed to an article from 1953 by W. Cline - who wasn't even a linguist, but an anthropologist! This is unhelpful to say the least. - Lameen Souag (talk) 08:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Almoravid Dynasty

Hello Omar - Please take a look at Talk:Almoravid dynasty#NPOV : Arab-Berber self glorification, a user is mass tagging the article for some ethnic reasons. You're opinion would be appreciated. Thank you. Tachfin (talk) 05:16, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Flag of Western Sahara

Please keep an eye on this. Nightw 04:42, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

There's more people at Wikipedia:WikiProject Morocco/Members, Night w, don't miss out. ¦ Reisio (talk) 06:51, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that, but this is the editor whose contribution you reverted on that page. Nightw 07:01, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh? Are you saying 41.141.193.180 is Omar-Toons? That would be interesting. ¦ Reisio (talk) 07:08, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Flag of Western Sahara". Thank you. --Nightw 07:49, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

University definition section

Hi,

You recently added a neutrality template to the Definition section of the article University. It would help things proceed if you discussed your concerns on the talk page. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 19:48, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments requested at Flag of Western Sahara

Hello - Your comment is requested over at Talk:Flag of Western Sahara; there is an RfC underway there to help decide what the article contents should be. If you can take some time to share your opinion on the matter, it would be very much appreciated. --Tachfin (talk) 09:44, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Kingdom of Fez, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Spanish and Fez (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:50, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

This source

Have you looked at this source[15]?VR _talk 22:33, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Did you know...

• ... that you are a sockpuppet? 80.74.137.161 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:33, 7 January 2012 (UTC).

"Rabat" in 1413 chart

Hi Omar-Toons.

I am currently writing up a page on 14th/15th C. Majorcan cartographer Mecia de Villadestes. He drafted a 1413 portolan chart essentially summarizing the accumulated European knowledge of Africa before the age of exploration. It is very similar to the Catalan Atlas of 1375, but more detailed, with lots of the stations of the trans-Saharan trade routes - basically his interpetations from Arab sources (al-Bakri, al-Idrisi, etc.) I have been deciphering all his towns and labels, and writing up a key (you can see a partial prelude at the Senegal River page).

There is a couple of questions I have on Moroccan geography which I wonder if I can press you for help on, if you have time? There is a high-resolution copy of the 1413 Viladestes chart at wiki-commons. right here

My main question is essentially this: if you look at Morocco, you'll notice he's got a depiction of what seems like the Sebou River (it enters north of Sale, so can't be the Bou Regreg). It forks into two branches, just like the real Sebou. The southern branch passes through the middle of Fez (depicted as "twin cities", naturally). But the northern branch of the Sebou goes on to form an "island" at the end, and in the middle of the island is a citadel with the label "Rabat". Do you have any hunch what this citadel of "Rabat" might be? (obviously not modern Rabat; "Anafe" is denoted on the coast much below that).

(It is common for Viladestes to simply assume and draw a circular "river island" when there is a location that's nearly surrounded on all sides by rivers, cf. Sijilmassa, below the Atlas range, is depicted as an island.)

My first temptation was to assume this "Rabat" was al-Qasr el-Kebir, simply because of the name (fortress/castle). But the upper branch is clearly not the Loukkos (look closely, he has Larache/al-Araish denoted on the coast as "laraix", with no entry). Moreover, this "Rabat" looks very much inland.

Do you know of any 14th/15th C. fortress, on the Sebou's northern tributary (what's it called by the way?) which might fit the bill for this "Rabat"? Since you seem to be the kind of fellow who pores over archaic Moroccan maps, I thought I'd give you a try. Walrasiad (talk) 08:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Taza seems right. It was an early Marinid stronghold too, so it makes sense to highlight it. Walrasiad (talk) 19:36, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal

Hi there. I have offered to mediate a MedCab case you are involved in here. If all involved parties accept this offer, I hope to be able to bring a reconciliation on the issue. I would appreciate it if you could read the statement I posted on the page and let me know if you accept my offer of mediation. Thanks. Whenaxis about | talk 02:11, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again. If you are still interested in the case, it's still open here. So, when you are available feel free to take a look and leave a message. If not, please notify me on my talk page of your absteinance from the case. Thanks, Whenaxis about | talk 21:23, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Another article

Regarding this edit of yours, I'm thinking of just creating another article with this material ("Medieval Islamic institutions of higher learning"). Gun Powder Ma should, in theory, not try to blank that article. This action also has the support of Jonathan A Jones.VR _talk 05:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Morocco's map in Football Articls

Hi, I'm user in Wikipedia, I've noticed that an Algerian ill-intentionned user [16] is trying to put morocco's map without western sahara in spite of the fact that FIFA recognize the territory as part of Morocco [17], I've noticed in your contributions that you've a lot of knowledge about the subject, si I hope you accept my invitation to participate in a debate about the matter here [18] Thanks in advance --194.204.217.78 (talk) 09:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring

[19] You were blocked recently for edit warring on Template:History of Morocco and I see you are again engaged in an edit war. Please stop and use the talk page. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:13, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

Hi. When you recently edited Saadi dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Safi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Abdelkader

Hello, Omar-toons. You have new messages at Talk:Abdelkader El Djezairi.
Message added 11:34, 29 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ANI

Inappropriate As I pointed out here, you've used ANI in an inappropriate manner. I would like you to revisit your post there and explain why it is you think that you should post at ANI rather than the respective articles' talk pages or my user talk. I've responded to all of your allegations and they're largely spurious, so I'm disappointed to see you resorting to this. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Please stop

Western Sahara It's obvious that several users (sean.hoyland, dzlinker, chipmunkdavis, and myself) find your reverts unacceptable, especially since you're intransigent about posting to talk. Adding in your spurious ANI post and it's getting harder to assume good faith and collaboration on your part. Simply put, your reverts will themselves be reverted (by myself or someone else), so it's pointless to keep on doing it and it's only going to make it harder for us to work together to make good content. If you don't post to talk somewhere to explain yourself and seek consensus, not only are you wasting your time reverting, but you're fostering ill will amongst other editors who could be collaborators with you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Algerians

Please take a look at the world factbook - Dzlinker (talk) 10:03, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Berber people". Thank you. --Dzlinker (talk) 11:29, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I was surprised by the fact that I was blocked after the user Gun Powder Ma reported me to the 3RR noticeboard. Why was I surprised? Because the diffs he reported are not fairly used, since I made a series of edits and I didn't "delete" his edits, but I just putted the paragraph on the right section [20] (I deleted the quotes and only let the reference, as it is the common use on WP). Unfortunately, this was dishonestly reported by Gun Powder Ma, and, as I see, the admin who blocked me didn't verify the whole thing, especially the entire history of the article Morocco [21] that clearly shows that the first diff concerns the revert of an unilateral editing about a highly polemic content (related to Western Sahara) that I didn't undo after a second revert by Gun Powder Ma, and that the main problematic user is the one who reported me, as that he is still engaged in an edit-war with other users about the same problem (editorial/POV) [22][23][24][25] (On the 3rr report he also includes the revert of an IP edit [26] which is absolutely irrelevant in this case and isn't related by any way to the other edits). By the way, on my two previous blockings I recognized my fault, but this time I think that it wasn't mine. If the explanations that I gave above are satisfactory, then my blocking isn't justified, but if they are not, Gun Powder Ma should also be blocked since he is the main edit-warrior on this article, not me, and that the fact that he 'reported me first' doesn't make me the one to blame. Thanks in advance,
--Omar-Toons (talk) 07:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

The very fact that you can use the expression "doesn't make me the one to blame" indicates that you have not grasped what "edit warring" means. Making several reversions in an article in a short time is edit warring. Whether anyone else has also been edit warring is irrelevant. You edit warred, which justifies the block. Your unblock request appears to be an attempt to make two points: (1) your edits were justified, and (2) someone else did bad things. Neither of those has the remotest relevance to a block for edit warring. Wikipedia's policy on edit warring is, essentially, "don't edit war", not "don't edit war unless you think you are right", or "don't edit war unless someone else is edit warring too". JamesBWatson (talk) 11:35, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

---

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.

Block extended

For socking using User:197.247.73.34. Black Kite (talk) 19:33, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Huh? Did you even compare this IP with the ones I use? Made a RCU? Btw, http://www.iplocation.net/index.php locates the IP in Casablanca (I wasn't there for weeks and I live in Rabat, Morocco, btw) and I wasn't on WP for hours... obviously...

I'm giving up!

Omar-Toons (talk) 20:28, 26 July 2012 (UTC)