User talk:Sss2sss

Welcome!

Hi Sss2sss! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Kj cheetham (talk) 11:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

that's very kind of you. Much appreciated Sss2sss (talk) 14:25, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I am leaving wikipedia once and for all

If you would want to give me one favor before me leaving, please read this until the end.

I've made my account quite recently and I've almost contributed to nothing in wikipedia (even my 50 edits are only talk). But even though I've seen enough. If I would sum up my days spend here here I would say it was nothing but a headache (litterarly I've stressed so much that I even had many headaches and hard times to sleep. My first and only contribution was in zirid page aming to change what I've seen as a contreverstial information (you can see everything in my contribution history) It started to look as like if that it is some vandalising act (for a frustrated newbie I didn't really know what to do after getting reverted again and again) until I've found talk pages. I thought that the case finally solved as my Knowledge for history of north africa is quite good (My hobby is reading history books and I've read dozens of them aither recent or very old ones. Honestly the books my father had in his library were quite helpful for the subject). But soon after I started the discussion in talk it turned out to becoming a very long one. As I was stucked in front of a self confident nationalist who wants to keep everything for his own country algeria (I normally don't want to judge on or disrespect people but I am in a quite rage right now). The talk was going well until he and another contributer I asked to help (because he sound neutral and unterested in this subject) somehow quitted and would only rejoin after the one I called from the third opinion noticeboard mentionned something about reporting to admins (if others quit the talk and keep reverting my edit).

Long story short recently after all my efforts I made in searching for information and in reading books tge discussion got closed by the other two with taking in account my opinion. The page got closed with many of my questions being just skipped. That's my problem from the start I keep asking and repeating my question but they just move forward and skip my questions. (is it even Reasonable to close the talk if there was not a consenus about that ? And if my questions wasn't answered

I really thought that I could have help the wikipedia community with my Knowledge but sadly this bad experiance will make just make me stop.

If I would report something I will request from admins here to keep a close eye on north africa history pages as they are filled with vandals or more like baised contributors who keep pushing for baised information instead of neutral and serious contributions. You can really see the amounts of edits and reverts on these pages with some kind of lobbying by older users.

You can make a look at my last edit to know more about why I decided to leave.

You don't believe how it feels relieving to share my pain here. And how much I would be glad if someone read all the way until this last phrases. Before deconnecting from my account I will give an eye once or twice on here to see if someone replied (as my biggest difficulties here is people reading what I write and ignoring me) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sss2sss (talk • contribs) 22:36, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

• It looks like the root of this is you changing a date to 972 when the source cited describes the Fatimids (not the Zirids) moving the Fatimid capital to Cairo (not Kairouan) in 972. You then cited a document that says the Zirid dynasty started in 972, which would mean they did not have a capital before then. @Sss2sss: You could have avoided the whole headache if you assumed good faith and were willing to accept that you made a mistake. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:51, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
  • thank you for you reply for the first link encyclopedia britannica I was talking about

    when moving to his new capital of Cairo (972), to appoint Yūsuf Buluggīn I ibn Zīrī (the founder of the zirid dynasty) governor of al-Qayrawān

    As the zirids inherited their kingdom from the fatimids. The problem is that other sources have listed ashir as a capital for the zirids before 972 as like this quote mentionned in this talk

    Historical Dictionary of Algeria, Phillip C. Naylor, page 465;"Yusuf ibn Zirid ibn Manad and his Sanhaja Berbers had helped the Fatimids against the Ibadi forces of Abu Yazid and the Zanata west of Tiaret. He constructed his capital at Ashir (Achir) in the Titteri Mountain region." --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:22, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

    . At the time before 972 zirids who were centered in ashir were not a proper indepandant dynasty but more like autonoumus sanhaja leaders incorporated into the Fatimid dynasty. So it is worth mentionning that they were centered in ashir and since some sources clearly used the word capital I thought about why not mention it like that. Either way I am not willing to more discuss this issue as I already had enough headaches from it. I shared my experiance here so that admins would know the issues new editors could face. And if I would assume a last hope of a good faith I would hope that someone who is well educated in the topic would fix it (of course if I was right and if in reality it really needed fixing). And if I am wrong I won't try further to impose my opinion. Sss2sss (talk) 23:32, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

    I can't comment on your content dispute and am too lazy to dive into this in detail, but generally if editors are in disagreement on content you can follow the steps outlined at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Outside input can often be a good idea, so trying to list the issue at history-related WikiProjects can alert interested editors to the discussion, who may be able to weigh in. If you end up wanting to get a controversial change done it can take some persistence. Ultimately, it's a big encyclopaedia: if one of your changes cannot get through you can always find somewhere else to edit. Edit in areas you enjoy, and as soon as you stop finding it enjoyable question if this particular change is really worth going through the stress. If not, it's better just to move on to a different issue, article or area entirely, as appropriate -- Wikipedia is rarely ever worth losing any sleep over. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 23:49, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

    @Sss2sss: it's great that you have a lot of knowledge, but Wikipedia requires reliable sources generally secondary sources. As was mentioned in the talk page discussion, Britannica is not a good source. You mentioned reading books in your father's library. If you were able to cite these books, this would likely help advance your case a great deal assuming these books are reliable secondary sources. It's fine if these books are in Arabic or some other language. If there is uncertainty over what the book says, you can provide a necessary quote in Arabic (or whatever) with your own (not a machine) translation in English to help. If there is dispute between the sources and all of them are good quality, then our article will generally reflect both points of view. Note that getting back first point, we cannot rely on what you've read or your personal knowledge if you are unable to cite precisely where it came from. Note because we are forbidden from WP:OR, if one source clearly says something e.g. X was established as the capital in Y; but another sources says something else which with a lot of interpretation (e.g. A was the ruler living in B since C) can be argued to conflict, we are likely to just accept the source which is clear. You will need to find a source which doesn't require too much on your own interpretation or sythesis of how things normally work. Nil Einne (talk) 07:45, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

    BTW, I see zero indication that anyone involved is doing anything due to nationalist reasons. That's a very serious accusation, and you need strong evidence if you are going to make it or it is likely to be seen as a personal attack. Being angry is no excuse. I suggest you withdraw that allegation if you don't have evidence. Nil Einne (talk) 12:40, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

• I've moved this from WP:AN, despite what you think about the community, centralized noticeboards are not the place for that discussion. --qedk (t 愛 c) 08:43, 22 November 2020 (UTC)