User talk:MakhzenHuman

December 2021

Your account has been blocked from editing Wikipedia because your username, MakhzenBot, does not meet our username policy. Your username is the principal reason for the block. You are welcome to continue editing after you have selected a new username that meets the username policy guidelines, which are summarized below.

Per the username policy, a username should represent an individual and should not: represent a group or organization; be promotional; be misleading (such as indicating possession of special user rights or being a "Bot" account (unless approved for such purposes)); be offensive or otherwise disruptive. However, a username that contains the name of a organization and also identifies you individually, such as "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87" is allowed, though, among others, the guidance on conflict of interest and the policy of paid-contribution disclosure are relevant.

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our username policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you wish for your existing contributions to carry over under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} below. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "Email this user" from their talk page.
At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a change of name request.
Your requested new username cannot already be in use. Therefore, please check the list here to see if a name is taken prior to requesting a change of name.

Appeals: If, after reading the guide to appealing blocks you believe you were blocked in error, then you may appeal this block by adding {{unblock|Your reason here}} below this notice.

This is not an approved bot account. Cullen328 (talk) 17:34, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Requested username:

MakhzenHuman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Accept reason:

I have renamed and unblocked your account. Welcome back. PhilKnight (talk) 21:25, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

Why are you changing the order (putting Algeria last in the Fantasia article)? This cannot be by accident since you've done the same thing in your first edit and your claim that you "made the order alphabetical" is clearly not true. M.Bitton (talk) 19:01, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is the list according to my edit ([1]):

"It is present in Algeria, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger and Tunisia."

I believe this is a honest mistake, I just want to clarify it. I don't know how I should order lists, honestly. My first edit ordered that list based out of how many Fantasia festivals there were in the respective countries. I sorted them alphabetically, I don't know what you're talking about. I may fix it if you offer clarification. Thank you for the concern :-), -MakhzenHuman (talk) 19:12, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking about the fact that you moved the Tbourida up and moved the Algeria section to the bottom. M.Bitton (talk) 19:14, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you reverted my edit while ignoring my question. Is there a reason for that? 19:19, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

I did that believing Tbourida is more common than Algerian fantasia as there are 140 sorbas in Algeria according to French wikipedia compared to 309 in 2014 according to the SOREC, the section is also larger. Again, I'm not familiar about how Wikipedia sorts it. P.S. aren't you pushing Morocco to the bottom? :O, no problem though, peace and love -MakhzenHuman (talk) 19:22, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I take a bit of time to write my responses, I'll respond before I edit next time, that is my mistake. -MakhzenHuman (talk) 19:22, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's your POV and the section being larger (for now) doesn't justify your change. M.Bitton (talk) 19:24, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I try to stay objective, however, humans are flawed. Statistics regarding sorbas still hold up though, and that is not my POV, the number is on French Wikipedia, if you could provide another statistic saying that Fantasia is more commonly found in Algeria than in Morocco, I would appreciate that. -MakhzenHuman (talk) 19:27, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what modern statistics have to do with something that goes back centuries. M.Bitton (talk) 19:29, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, that is a compelling argument, however, Fantasia is still being practiced to this day, neither Morocco or Algeria were states as we know them in the 7th century. Is the reason why you're keeping Algeria on top alphabetical? Please provide a reason why you're keeping this way. -MakhzenHuman (talk) 19:36, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're the one who want to change it, therefore it's you who needs to provide a valid reason (based on WP policies and guidelines) for that. M.Bitton (talk) 19:39, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have provided my reasoning, if you believe it is flawed, kindly leave it how you edited it. -MakhzenHuman (talk) 19:44, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

First, you add something that makes no sense (as there is no difference between the Polisario and SADR) and then you remove a source without explanation. What exactly are you playing at? M.Bitton (talk) 20:03, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and happy new year, on the page for the Western Sahara War, it has been formatted as such, distinguishing the Polisario and the SADR. It's not a source, it's a footnote, I simply standardized it. Please calm down and try to understand me :-) MakhzenHuman (talk) 20:07, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1) It's wrong, regardless of where someone managed to introduce it. 2) You removed a source that was part of the footnote. M.Bitton (talk) 20:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, mea culpa, I have fixed it on both pages, thanks for the help bud. P.S. I have moved the part regarding MINURSO to another section of the article as you cannot put a reference in a reference. :-) MakhzenHuman (talk) 20:21, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reference is not inside a reference, it's inside a footnote. I suggest you restore it. M.Bitton (talk) 20:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, footnotes and references both use the <ref> element in terms of code, I'm afraid this is the best I can do. MakhzenHuman (talk) 20:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will have to sort it out myself, including the removal of the mention of casualties that you added to the leaders' section. M.Bitton (talk) 20:34, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Addah al-Bendir is already mentioned in the article, there is no need to add a ref to his name. M.Bitton (talk) 20:37, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, regarding the footnote issue, sorry about that, I wish you the best of luck! You're also right regarding al-Bendir :-) MakhzenHuman (talk) 20:38, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi MakhzenHuman! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 02:34, Tuesday, January 18, 2022 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Glorious Supreme Leader

What does "Glorious Supreme Leader" in this edit summary supposed to mean? Since this a WP:BLP matter, I have to insist that you provide an explanation.

While I'm here, why did you remove sourced content from Mohammed V of Morocco article? Your edit summary only mentions changing the portrait. M.Bitton (talk) 16:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1. Irony..... :(, Calling someone a "supreme leader" isn't exactly defamation, 2. This is impossible to prove, so it's basically your word vs. mine, that was an accidental roll-back, must've been my Visual Editor acting up, my bad. -MakhzenHuman (talk) 17:20, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted my edits on Mohammed V of Morocco, I *think* I accidentally edited an old version of it and caused a rollback. -MakhzenHuman (talk) 17:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's not funny, "Irony" does not explain why you did it or what you meant by it. The fact that you think that it is (i.e. having fun at a living person's expense is acceptable) and are mentioning a "defamation that is impossible to prove" is worrisome. M.Bitton (talk) 17:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mea culpa, thought it was funny, I don't think I can delete my edit summary. You read that wrong bud! I didn't talk that the defamation was "impossible to prove", I said with regards to the whole story about me mistakingly editing Mohammed V's page, if I wrote that wrong, I apologize. That is why I set two bullet points. I find the fact that you are using the edit summary as a basis to do an ad hominem attack quite ignorant, but it's alright :-) -MakhzenHuman (talk) 18:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reminding you not to have fun at a living person's expense is not "an ad hominem attack", and it certainly doesn't make one "ignorant" for doing so. M.Bitton (talk) 18:48, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reminding me! :-) I interpret saying that my way of thinking "fact that you think" based out of that edit summary is "worrisome" is at the very least condescending and not really a bona fide reminder, but that is all interpretation. -MakhzenHuman (talk) 19:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That was in reply to your "explanation", and yes, it is worrisome when an editor thinks that having fun at a living person's expense is acceptable. M.Bitton (talk) 19:37, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, alright, I won't be mentioning living people in my edit summaries. Thank you :-) -MakhzenHuman (talk) 20:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hichem Aboud has been accepted

Hichem Aboud, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Rusalkii (talk) 04:08, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All caps

Care to explain why you've been changing "Polisario" to "POLISARIO" (including in in links)? This cannot be accidental as you've done it more than once. M.Bitton (talk) 17:34, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's an old typing habit that I got from reading old Polisario newsletters when working on an essay. It seems like both capitalizations are proper as it's an initialism of the Spanish name for it, but I have reverted it back for you. :-) --MakhzenHuman (talk) 17:48, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I would like to express my sincere respect and gratitude for being the #2 editor of my talk page, appreciate it, thank you! :-) --MakhzenHuman (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

P.P.S. you became #2 after I sent that message :-(, you must try harder next time --MakhzenHuman (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hassan II of Morocco, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Éric Laurent. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Assessing Hassan II

I've reassessed the article per your request. Thanks for all your work on it Tom B (talk) 12:50, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]