User talk:Koodbuur

Misleading information

This editing is not disruptive, it is removing false and misleading information. And at the end the correct info will prevail.

Can you define what is the Legal base for Borama to belong to "Somaliland"? what is the legal status of "Somaliland"? How did Borama ceceeded from the Federal Republic of Somalia?

Please provide sources that indicate that Borama^[1] is part of the Federal Republic of Somalia. There are many sources that indicate that Borama is part of Somaliland [1][2]. As well, despite not attaining de jure recognition, Somaliland has been regarded as a separate entity from the Federal Republic of Somalia [3][4] Koodbuur (talk) 22:52, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The British government does not recognise the self-proclaimed state of Somaliland.^[2]

Somaliland is not recognised as a state - the United States State Department considers the self-proclaimed state of Somaliland as within the territory of Somalia.^[3]

As the self-proclaimed state of Somaliland is not recognised as sovereign state, it is inappropriate to include any city, district or region to a non recognised statelet.

July 2017

Hello, I'm Yamaguchi先生. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Isaaq, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 19:16, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Somaliland. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

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; 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.
You reverted a user after they provided sources on the talk page, without responding to them on the talk page, all while telling them to use the talk page. A dispute on the talk page does not give you the right to edit war, and you will be blocked from editing if I see you doing that again. Swarm ♠ 19:19, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I reverted was because the source did not support their argument, but rather state that the clan does reside in the region exclusively "whereas the Dhulbahante almost exclusively inhabit Sool region." (page no. 10). The editor was arguing that the Dhulbahante clan is the sole inhabitant of the region, while the source suggests otherwise. Though I should have posted that in the talk page, which I now did. Koodbuur (talk) 15:02, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was not arguing the that Dhulbahante 'soley' inhabit the sool region, but, that they are the overwhelming majority and therefore 'almost exclusively' inhabit the region per the sources cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xargaga (talk • contribs) 21:27, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, the statement that Dhulbahante "almost exclusively" inhabit Sool province is ambiguous. It can be interpreted as that the Dhulbahante reside almost entirely in Sool province. Secondly, given that you have acknowledged that there are other clans living in (3 of the 4 districts) the region, it is not neutral and misleading to readers to state that Dhulbahante are the "almost exclusive" inhabitants of Sool province. Koodbuur (talk) 21:38, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute Resolution

I have requested dispute resolution - (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Somaliland#Clans_sub-section). Xargaga (talk) 21:23, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Somaliland - Clan System". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 6 December 2017.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 05:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Koodbuur. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Somaliland - Clan System, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:03, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

February 2018

Your recent editing history at Somalis 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 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 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. CabuuwaaqWanaag (talk) 16:24, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Multi-user edit war at Somalis. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:13, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kzl55, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Sro23 (talk) 05:47, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Koodbuur. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits at Dilla Massacre

Your recent editing history at Dilla_Massacre 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aqooni (talk • contribs) 20:56, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:15, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

@Oshwah: My edits on Battle of Dilla were not disruptive. I provided a detailed description as to why my edits were constructive [5] and also discussed those reasons on the talk page [6]. @Aqooni has violated 3RR [7] [8] [9] [10] despite warning and continues to reinstate misquoted and unsourced material. Aqooni has a long history of edit warring and was previously blocked twice for that [11]. I have been in good standing throughout my history on Wikipedia. I strongly urge you to reconsider. Koodbuur (talk) 21:34, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Procedural accept; your block has expired. Yamla (talk) 13:08, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Koodbuur - In order to be completely fair to you and make sure that your request is reviewed impartially and by someone who is a completely neutral party in the matter, I'm going to leave your request to be evaluated by a different administrator. This will assure that it's reviewed fairly and honestly, and that the end result in the matter reflects the right thing to do. I want to make sure that any administrative actions I take are correct and justified, and having the block evaluated by another admin will help to make sure that I'm held accountable for my actions. Please stand by... another administrator will review your request soon. Thank you for appealing your block and for explaining your position in a well-detailed manner. :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:50, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PoV pushing

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Somaliland PoV pushing. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 15:17, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

salaan sare sxb

asc

page yada borama iyo saylac way yara qaldanyihiin, calanka qaladka ah baa la soo galiyay, ma yara saxi kartaa sxb? ileen adigu waxaad tahay user oo la ixtiraamo

Gadhwayne (talk) 17:44, 3 April 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) 02:53, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Hello @Koodbuur:,

Since you're an editor who has extensively contributed to Somaliland and Somalia-related topics, your input in Category talk:Disputed territory between Somaliland and Puntland would be appreciated.

Many thanks, Dabaqabad (talk) 20:48, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:47, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Noticeboard discussion: Disputed territory between Somaliland and Puntland discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at [[12]] regarding efforts to reach concensus on articles in the disputed regions of Sool, Sanaag and Cayn.Shirshore (talk) 01:10, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/somalia.pdf

[2] ttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/626248/FOI_0328-17_letter.pdf

[3] ttps://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2863.htm

[1]

[2]

[3]