User talk:Rimman

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or sock puppetry.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Dougweller (talk) 20:20, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013[edit]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Mauritania. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 20:21, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Everything I add is referenced or easily verifiable. Mauritania's page is full of lies and distortions and intend to correct it as my time permit. I had my work undone by some admins who do not know any thing about Mauritania and do not take the time to read. Please help me straighten this page out. Thanks

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 23:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to give up on my country's page my friends. If you take the time and read what I post, you will realize that everything I post is backed by reliable source. So, lets have a good fight. Thanks

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. Materialscientist (talk) 23:31, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

cite one edit of mine that does not have a link to a reliable published source! I am not violating, simply trying to correct the record, any policy and I ask you again to read before your undo my edits.

You are posting libelous claims about living people, which, contrary to your assertions, can not be verified by the sources you provide. This violates our WP:BLP policy. Do not repeat that - this is a blockable offense. Materialscientist (talk) 04:25, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Mauritania shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Dougweller (talk) 08:52, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note[edit]

Because your edits are violations of our WP:BLP policy (among the other problems), they can be reverted by other editors as many times as you make them as reverting BLP violations is an exemption from 3RR. You absolutely must discuss these on the talk page before making these edits again. Dougweller (talk) 08:55, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Dougweller (talk) 13:18, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for contravening Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 01:31, 7 April 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here I have been editing two pages. Mauritania and Mohamed Ould Abd Al Aziz, the president of Mauritania. These two pages are full of fiction. Every time I tried to correct them, some admin who I am sure can not even locate Mauritania on a map would undo my edits. All I am asking is to stop undoing my edits and start a discussion about the material that I am adding. Example, all the stuff about slavery is B.S. There are no proven cases of slavery in Mauritania. It is illegal under Mauritanian law. When I added this on the page. Some admin took down! Please remove this unfair block.

Decline reason:

You were clearly in breach of Wikipedia's WP:BLP policy several times, yet you persisted even after being warned. Please read and understand that policy - if you continue with the same approach after your block expires, you are likely to be blocked again for longer -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 04:04, 7 April 2013 (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.

Just because slavery is illegal doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Slavery exists in most countries, including probably all Western countries such as the US and the UK. There are somewhere between 12 and 27 million slaves in the world, and it has been suggested that this is a record number - there weren't this many slaves at the time when it was legal. Dougweller (talk) 05:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]