User talk:Mooezzz

September 2023

Hello, I'm Filmssssssssssss. I noticed that you recently removed content from Mohammed Ameziane without adequately 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; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 (talk) 18:50, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Abd el-Krim. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 11:34, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Fez (hat), you may be blocked from editing. M.Bitton (talk) 11:36, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I updated information that was inaccurate dont see how thats a problem Mooezzz (talk) 11:37, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, you are clearly pushing a nationalist POV and removing properly sourced content in the process. M.Bitton (talk) 11:40, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No i am not and i am sure not a Nationalist but nvm here you cant even update articles correctly have a nice day Mooezzz (talk) 11:42, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Almoravid dynasty. M.Bitton (talk) 11:38, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed Information that is incorrect and untrue im a riffian myself and have relatives related to mohammed ameziane dont remove my changes because ive only removed what was false

read above what i said Mooezzz (talk) 18:58, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have declared a conflict of interest with Mohammed Ameziane, you should not be editing that article directly. —C.Fred (talk) 11:40, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

Hello, I'm TimothyBlue. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 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. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. [1], [2], + see user contribution history // Timothy :: talk 15:21, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you tell me to what i didnt give a reliable source Mooezzz (talk) 15:32, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Aziz Akhannouch, 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. Skitash (talk) 16:43, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Tariq ibn Ziyad. M.Bitton (talk) 15:04, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Tariq ibn Ziyad 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; read about 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Skitash (talk) 15:14, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

idk what a edit war is i simply included extra information Mooezzz (talk) 15:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Abdallah ibn Yasin. M.Bitton (talk) 02:05, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

how was this wrong? Its a fact Mooezzz (talk) 02:07, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Abd el-Krim. Skitash (talk) 16:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I literally gave you the source wth? The arabic Wikipedia page of andelkrim literally states that he was known as the emir of the rif. So you dont accept your own pages? Mooezzz (talk) 17:44, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, we don't. See WP:CIRC. Daniel Case (talk) 19:07, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well that coudlve been said earlier instead of just informing me that the changes were removed how about explaining stuff? "and while we're at it ..." stop being so comical lmao Mooezzz (talk) 19:29, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And while we're at it ...

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 for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 19:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at King of Morocco, you may be blocked from editing. R Prazeres (talk) 23:28, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I've re-added the important part of your edit (here). But please do not add or change content again without citing reliable sources; this has been explicitly indicated to you many times before. R Prazeres (talk) 23:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean thats a famous fact that he holds the title of amir al mouminine and thats how he has such a big authority in religious matters its even on wikipedia itself Mooezzz (talk) 00:20, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you're aware of it does not make it a "famous fact". It's a very specific fact that most readers would not know, therefore it requires a reliable source. If it's an easy fact to verify, then it should be easy to find a reliable source for it. Please make this a regular habit of your edits, otherwise they are likely to be reverted. R Prazeres (talk) 00:52, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

dude it actually is a famous fact but whatever Mooezzz (talk) 01:16, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Father of the Nation. M.Bitton (talk) 19:38, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Father of the Nation. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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:

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) 21:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Almoravid dynasty, you may be blocked from editing. Skitash (talk) 16:57, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What personal analysis? I just added Abdallah Ibn Yasin was the founder of the Dynasty which he was? Similarly the tribes of the Souss Region of Morocco was part of the coalition Mooezzz (talk) 17:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, you added utter nonsense. Frankly, your disruptive editing is getting out of hand and unless you stop, you will ultimately be reported to the admins. M.Bitton (talk) 17:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

how is that nonsense you can literally go and search it up its literally on the wiki page itself but you seem to not understand or simply dont want to Mooezzz (talk) 17:12, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024

Hi, please stop marking your edits as "minor". Wikipedia edits are only minor if they make superficial, uncontroversial changes such as typos or formatting corrections. Any edits that affect content or information should not be marked as "minor". See Help:Minor edit. Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 17:33, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

alright Mooezzz (talk) 13:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove it tho? Its the same in the page of Hassan II and Mohammed VI with the Tifinagh? Mooezzz (talk) 13:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Synorem. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Mohammed V of Morocco—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Synorem (talk) 13:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

wdym by it wasnt constructive? Its the official language of Morocco and the same on the page of Hassan II and Mohammed VI Mooezzz (talk) 13:16, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so I see - my apologies. Your edits have been restored. Apologies again for that. Synorem (talk) 13:17, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Mohammed V of Morocco. Skitash (talk) 13:25, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Segangan. Skitash (talk) 13:53, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:01, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]