Jump to content

User talk:Omar-toons: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Omar-toons (talk | contribs)
Line 113: Line 113:
:::::On the other hand, there were many discussions about this kind of subjects and no consensus was found, but we usually avoid anachronistic statements.
:::::On the other hand, there were many discussions about this kind of subjects and no consensus was found, but we usually avoid anachronistic statements.
:::::[[User:Omar-toons|Omar-toons]] ([[User talk:Omar-toons#top|talk]]) 23:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
:::::[[User:Omar-toons|Omar-toons]] ([[User talk:Omar-toons#top|talk]]) 23:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

lol still arguing about this shit! give up, there is better stuff to do! or just keep it on the frenchies wiki. -[[User:Dzlinker|Dzlinker]] ([[User talk:Dzlinker|talk]]) 23:24, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:24, 14 October 2012

Hello,
You are on my talk page, please don't forget to sign your message by typing (~~~~).
Please, don't insert your comments in the middle of other users' ones, start a new section or add your message below other users' ones in an already existing section.
Thanks!
OT

Archived discussions:


Is it always the case that you only inform hand-picked users about discussions on the neutrality board (ironically this very board), and not all those people who are involved in the subject? You forgot to notify half a dozen other editors...this is actually classical WP:Canvassing which is very much frowned upon in WP. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 19:59, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hilarious. He actually notified everybody who took part in the past NPOV discussion, including those who disagree with him. Whereas you have actually just notified people that agree with you. There's that "do as I say, not as I do" attitude, rearing its head once more. nableezy - 20:12, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
He did not notify at least five users who had participated in the discussion during the last couple of weeks, all of them happening to disagree with his views. This is plainly weak, are you guys here for doing serious work or just pushing your exotic views? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 20:17, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am sure they teach this in Europe, but when replying to somebody you should actually read what they wrote, instead of just imagining what they might have and replying to that. But maybe its just those darned madrassas that teach such subversive ideas. nableezy - 20:19, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

First Barbary War (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Ottoman
List of former sovereign states (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bougie

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 04:27, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited First Barbary War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ottoman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Loreen (singer): you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. TheGeneralUser (talk) 17:58, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

  • Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
  • Research: The most recent DR data
  • Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
  • Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
  • DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
  • Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
  • Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?
Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 19:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zayyanid dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beylik (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:28, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

for your contributions on the Zirids - the map is still under discussion. The max expansion map should be used instead of the map in 1000ce. Dzlinker (talk) 13:13, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Algerian Air Force, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Seeker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Chafarinas Islands (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Isla del Rey
Chefchaouen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Hammam

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:36, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

History of Morocco (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Al-Walid, Abdul Malek, Abd al-Malik II and Chérif

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

French Morocco

Hello

You just undid one of my modifications in Template:USAAF 12th Air Force World War II . You replaced French Morocco by Morocco knowing that the political entity existing at that time is French Morocco. At my big surprise, few minutes earlier, in the article Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, you replaced Algeria by French Algeria !!!! How it could be? And what is the logical basis of these two contributions? knowing that Morocco, Algeria as well as Tunisia were French...

Any revert you do in the future will be considered as vandalism. If you want to make any modification you have to discuss it FIRST...

Regards

Fort-Henry (talk) 15:22, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[1] -Omar-toons (talk) 22:08, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Since you are talking about territories, why did you insist on French Algeria in the article Claude Cohen-Tannoudji instead of Algeria which represents the territory? I repeat again: What is the logical basis of your modifications? If you replace French morocco by Morocco in the present template you MUST revert your modifications in the article Claude Cohen-Tannoudji. Do you understand? Fort-Henry (talk) 22:27, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Political entities "at the time" are used in Biographies' templates, that's why. --Omar-toons (talk) 22:34, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So so so, according to your understanding, we should use political entities at the time only in biographies. Where is that written in Wiki? Is there an official consensus or some official writing guidelines in Wiki telling that? If yes you must provide them that we can follow, otherwise do not use this kind of (arguments) again. Now if we should use the political entity's name of the time in biographies so I will mention in the article Hassan II of morocco, I will mention that the king was born in French Morocco.. Isn't it?????? Fort-Henry (talk) 22:49, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, since people born in Protectorates aren't considered the same way than the ones born in Colonies. For example, French people born in pre-1956 Morocco and Tunisia are considered (even officially by the French Gov) as born in these respective countries, while those born in French Algeria are considered as "born in France".
The same way a person born in Puerto-Rico isn't considered as born in the USA, while a person born in the Territory of Yukon (even if not a Province) is considered as "born in Canada". Is that too hard to understand?
On the other hand, there were many discussions about this kind of subjects and no consensus was found, but we usually avoid anachronistic statements.
Omar-toons (talk) 23:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

lol still arguing about this shit! give up, there is better stuff to do! or just keep it on the frenchies wiki. -Dzlinker (talk) 23:24, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]