User talk:Habar Awal king

Habar Awal king, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Habar Awal king! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Liz (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

22:02, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! Make sure you include citations~

Hi Habar Awal king, I saw that you added some content to Heis (town). Remember to connect this new information to citations: for content to stay reliable on Wikipedia, we prefer that most content be verified with a citation to a Reliable source. I have added a WP:Citation needed statement to one such piece of content on Heis (town). I hope you can support the contet, Sadads (talk) 15:33, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fail to cite source

Greetings Habar Awal king, You fails to cite sources. Can you please turn the the Talk page and provide your sources on the pages you wish the edit so we can reach an consensus? - AlaskaLava, 21:27, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.

May 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Habr Awal. 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. Eagleash (talk) 17:28, 14 May 2017 (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:80.4.136.59 reported by User:Cosmic Clone (Result: ). Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 17:38, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Violation of the Three revert rule

Your recent editing history 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. El_C 19:30, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Awdal

When something you add to an article, as you did at Awdal, and it is removed, with the reason given being that it was "unsourced" -- i.e., it has no citation from a reliable source so that the information could be verified -- and was "POV", i.e. showed a "point of view" or opinion (see WP:NPOV), then do not restore without fixing the problems. That is called edit warring and it can get you blocked from editing. So, do not re-add that information unless it has a citation from a reliable source to support it, and make sure that it is written in a neutral way. Thanks.

You have already been included in a discussion in respect of edit-warring. Please do not continue to edit war as to do so could well lead to loss of editing privileges. Please discuss the matter at the article talk page. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 19:32, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. 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 request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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. Alexf^(talk) 20:14, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Abyssinian–Adal war, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Alcherin (talk) 21:34, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Garadag, 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. - Arjayay (talk) 09:07, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Xudun, Somalia, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 09:25, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did in multiple pages. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did in multiple pages including Xudun, Somalia, Sool, Somalia and Haylan‎ you may be blocked from editing. - Somajeeste (talk) 02:42, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at Habr Awal.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. - Arjayay (talk) 10:39, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Garadag. - Arjayay (talk) 10:43, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Widr (talk) 12:26, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extended two more weeks for block evasion. [1] --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:43, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Gabiley.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Gabiley.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 21:45, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

June 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:28, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: You are in the express lane heading towards the exit marked "Indefinite Block." I strongly advise you to change directions while you still can. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:29, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Agabar) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Agabar, Habar Awal king!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Can you please add your source? Thanks for creating this.

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 13:37, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 10:15, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have more than 20 guys who can blitz your page with references and fact. If you dont stop trying to fake edit our pages then you will meet their response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.136.59 (talk) 14:21, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for continued disruption, refusal to discuss. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 18:46, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive Editing

Hi Habar Awal king,

You have deleted sourced material on the Baki District and Dilla pages and have added unsourced information on the Awdal page which are disruptive edits. I will hereby issue you a warning. JamalWalal, 23:30, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.

Recent edit to Xudun, Somalia

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you removed some content from Xudun, Somalia without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 06:01, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]