User talk:Noname JR

November 2020

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Houari Boumédiène, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 17:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Bouïra, you may be blocked from editing. M.Bitton (talk) 21:27, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Algeria; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:You've

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. M.Bitton (talk) 13:28, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 21:57, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you blank out or remove content from Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Algeria. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 03:57, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In Algeria, Tamazight is an official language, I noticed a lot of error about some articles (mainly historic ones).--Noname JR (talk) 04:32, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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:Noname_JR reported by User:M.Bitton (Result: ). Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 16:19, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Algeria) for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. —C.Fred (talk) 17:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Hi, I had added algerian constitution to prove that tamazight and arabic are official languages and not only arabic neither french,[3]--Noname JR (talk) 19:32, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 19:37, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You should mention that in the discussion at the talk page and wait for consensus to decide to remove French and add the Tamazight version of the name. You cannot keep making the same edit over and over in the hope that it sticks. —C.Fred (talk) 19:41, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I added algerian constitution (and tamazight names) that prove there are 2 official languages (arabic and tamazight), only with the algerian constitution is enough like 2+2 = 4, that's no sense if even the algerian constitution is contested for a consensus...--Noname JR (talk) 19:48, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your block has expired. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 17:02, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your block is not about what sources you added; it's about your refusal to discuss the matter on the talk page and wait for a change. For instance, you need to show that the constitution was amended to specify orthography of Tamazight. —C.Fred (talk) 19:51, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i just checked french wiki about algeria, same for constitution and why on Morocco page there are tamazight transcription (official language too)--Noname JR (talk) 19:54, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If a reference is dead, flag it as dead. Do not remove the reference entirely, as you did here. —C.Fred (talk) 21:12, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why keeping a reference without info inside ?--Noname JR (talk) 21:14, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There was info in the reference: title, publisher, date, and URL. —C.Fred (talk) 21:16, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And nothing inside.--Noname JR (talk) 21:17, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In which case, the link should be flagged as dead. I'll check for an archive version. —C.Fred (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a link to the archived version. —C.Fred (talk) 21:25, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have searched in FR? And even archived version is dead Algerie--Noname JR (talk) 21:29, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The archived version is not dead. I had to go back a few versions, but the article has a working archive link now. —C.Fred (talk) 21:31, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, how many is an "Amazigh speaker"? You've said that's the number of native speakers of Standard Moroccan Berber. —C.Fred (talk) 21:33, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazighe_standard_marocain "Amazighophone" and you can check this Algerie--Noname JR (talk) 21:36, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The French article does not specify a number either; that's what I've placed in the English article. —C.Fred (talk) 21:37, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are more information about Magrheb in French or in Spanish than in English.--Noname JR (talk) 21:53, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which matters not one bit here. The English Wikipedia has requirements for sourcing that are different from other languages' wikis. —C.Fred (talk) 21:55, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Find an Algerian constitution in English so....--Noname JR (talk) 23:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning before next edit-warring block

{{subst:uw-ew4}} OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

French isn't an official language only Mr Bitton disagree and moreover i added sources.--Noname JR (talk) 01:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2nd block for edit warring; subsequent blocks will be for longer durations

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}.

OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 01:41, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Hi, I had added some sources (The algerian constitution and a conference from Louis Leschi), removed, I let multiple comments in talk page about language status (mostly tamazight) with some sources again but Mr Bitton don't want to add Tifinagh alphabet for reasons that i don't understand (not only me)--Noname JR (talk) 01:51, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

What M.Bitton did is irrelevant to the fact you have been extensively edit-warring, and the unblock request above doesn't address this at all - indeed it only blames someone else. Please read WP:GAB before requesting unblock again. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I don't understand why there are french transcriptions [1] (unofficial language in Algeria) and not Tamazight (official language), [2][3],i had added sources. M.Bitton has removed some informations about Algeria Etymology [4] with sources.--Noname JR (talk) 04:48, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You completely ignored the last decline - if you do that again you will lose talk page access. In your next unblock request, you need to address the edit warring. PhilKnight (talk) 13:30, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Hi, M.Bitton has added an arab name for [5], but he is a kabyle man from Tizi Ouzou, it's disrespectful.--Noname JR (talk) 05:34, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per PhilKnight's comments on the previous decline, I'm removing talk page access and extending your block indefinitely. If and when you understand our policies against edit warring, you can submit an unblock request through the UTRS system. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:54, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

December 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:57, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

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/Noname JR, 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.

Askelaadden (talk) 22:01, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]