Yazebi

This is a message.

Avoid personal attacks thanks--Yazebi

bot

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Ancient history of Yemen has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Ancient history of Yemen was changed by Yazebi (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.961533 on 2015-11-22T10:28:47+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 10:28, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Ancient History of Yemen

Hello, it appears that you are trying to move the article, Ancient History of Yemen to the name Ancient Yemen. Unfortunately, the way you are doing this, by copying text and blanking the original, is not an appropriate way to move an article. If you believe that the article should be renamed, please create an inquiry on an appropriate talk or project page instead, explaining why it should be renamed. Additionally, if you believe that the article title, Ancient Yemen is a useful title for the article Ancient History of Yemen, you may create a redirect (or ask someone to create one), which would be less intrusive to the edit history of both article titles. Thanks! Rarkenin (talk) 14:28, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

article, Ancient Yemen

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Ancient Yemen. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Ancient history of Yemen. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Ancient history of Yemen – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Selinamoore (talk) 17:00, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

rename an article

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Ancient history of Yemen a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Meters (talk) 04:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC) OK thanks Meters--Yazebi (talk) 04:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Meters

thanks Meters--Yazebi (talk) 04:21, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

You are way past WP:3RR on this. Stop now or you will likely be blocked. Get consensus before renaming hte article, and then do it poperly if the move is approved. Cutting and pasting means that the entire history is lost. Meters (talk) 04:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

It's also no appropriate to copoy an article to a new name and then try to speedy the original title as a recently recreated article with the same content. When several editors undo your work you need to pay attention. Meters (talk) 04:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

thanks again Meters i just want to rename it that is all--Yazebi (talk) 04:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

I understand that, but several editors were telling you that you were doing it wrong. Ignoring them and continuing to do it your way is disruptive. Meters (talk) 04:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

i didn't understand it in the first time until you told me that Meters there is nothing wrong with telling a second time--Yazebi (talk) 04:18, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

You made the same cut and paste move 5 times and were reverted by a bot and 3 different editors. You are lucky you were not blocked. When experienced editors undo your edits pay attention. Meters (talk) 04:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

yes i understand that but because i am new here experienced editors must help new ones--Yazebi (talk) 04:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Mairoon Ali: revisions

Here's your next bit of help. When you undo an edit with leaving an edit summary, as you did here that's the same as calling he edit vandalism. The edit you undid was clearly not vandalism. In fact, it was a good edit, and your undo restored a grammatically flawed sentence. Meters (talk) 04:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

i fix it thanks for letting me know--Yazebi (talk) 04:38, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Ancient History of Yemen suggestions

Ancient History of Yemen rename suggestions--Yazebi (talk) 04:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

No edit summary

Hi! I do not know why you removed the portals.

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 04:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

i don't think it should be labeled as Terrorism as it will be viewed biased WhisperToMe.--Yazebi (talk) 04:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Then please do not remove the entire portal structure. I want to also link Libya and 2010s. If you object to one aspect please only remove that one aspect WhisperToMe (talk) 05:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Terrorism

using the word Terrorism is not good?--Yazebi (talk) 05:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015

Your recent editing history at Sukhoi Superjet 100 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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 BRD 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 your 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. Dr. K. 05:29, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Yazebi reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: ). Thank you. Dr. K. 06:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Accusation

please Notice that this user Yazebi (talk · contribs) didn't make any or very few dis-constructive edits.

please Notice that the edit war that has been going on as to which photo should be included in the info box as the lead photo for that article has been around since early 2012. please see [1] and continued until this days. thought Personally I am neutral this is what happened.--Yazebi (talk) 09:26, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

duck has Accused me of being a Soc of ghhghhhgh please see investigations/Gbgfbgfbgfb which i don't know why! apparently just because me and my friend User:Cyclopsox opposed his change of a photo unrelated to the article of an aircraft! a CU apparently found that  Confirmed Yazebi (talk · contribs) = Cyclopsox (talk · contribs) which is only right because we DO share an IP in the room but nonetheless we still have opinions about the picture duck try to impose on the article?? please Notice that when i undo ducks edits i didn't put the same photo as User:Cyclopsox but another picture related to the article. i was trying to come to a solution to the revert war that was going on. the thing is that duck claims like in the investigations Archive (trying to remove the featured picture)!!! apparently he thinks that because it is a featured picture it should be in the article regardless that it is not about the topic!!! which is an aircraft topic! and the photo that they are trying to impose is about a scene with sea and oceans and stuff similar! more like a tourist picture article type? i think we have an ILIKEIT situation here? Yazebi (talk) 08:23, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Two accounts, technically indistinguishable, doing the same kind of disruptive edits? We just don't care if they're controlled by the same person or not. Whether they're sockpuppets or meatpuppets - same ol' indefinite block is justified. Max Semenik (talk) 09:28, 26 November 2015 (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.

Don't remove declined requests, or you will lose access to this page. Max Semenik (talk) 10:28, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

As you wish: your request to lose access to further appeals has been granted. Max Semenik (talk) 10:38, 26 November 2015 (UTC)