User talk:Taluzet

Welcome!

Hi Taluzet! I noticed your contributions to Berber languages 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

Happy editing! StarryNightSky11 ☎ 20:35, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Berber languages, you may be blocked from editing. Skitash (talk) 21:58, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is that really poorly sourced? It is a fact that all amazigh groups in morocco use and used amazigh as an ethnonym, as well as all tuaregs which use a variety of amazigh (amajeq, amasheq) and the paper demonstrates that. If your source says it's not historically used, then it's just wrong.

Why did you remove my edit saying the gaf is a used character in Berber languages???? Taluzet (talk) 16:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I added very well sourced claims. Taluzet (talk) 17:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a side note, I am guessing you are Algerian, where most groups except the tuareg abandoned the word tamazight for the language, but I would like to inform you that in most of Morocco and the rest of the Tuareg territory it is not the case, I invite you to read the articles I referenced Taluzet (talk) 17:14, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Berber languages 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) 10:09, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I sent you messages, I am waiting for a reply. Taluzet (talk) 10:17, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Berber languages. Skitash (talk) 21:22, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Berber languages. Skitash (talk) 18:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Berber languages 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) 11:26, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Skitash (talk) 12:05, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had posted some supporting citations on the AN/I thread, and later integrated them into the article references of Berber languages. Please feel free to use them further, in that article or anywhere else. – .Raven .talk 00:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Taluzet (talk) 09:43, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

--Blablubbs (talk) 21:07, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Upon review, it appears that this block was in error. I have lifted it. My sincere apologies. --Blablubbs (talk) 03:28, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Culture of Morocco. Skitash (talk) 15:28, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I gave a valid reason, give me a valid reason for you to revert that edit under this reply. Taluzet (talk) 17:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Culture of Morocco 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) 17:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I filed a report in the administrators' notice board because you show a lot of bias, repetitively erasing Amazigh and undermining Amazigh people in Maghreb articles Taluzet (talk) 17:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]