User talk:Omar-toons

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:

Apr. 2010 - Jul. 2012

WP:Canvassing

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]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

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]

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

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.

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)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

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]

Disambiguation link notification for September 18

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]

Disambiguation link notification for September 25

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]

Disambiguation link notification for October 2

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]

I will ignore your comments about people born in the US...Those about people born in Canada made me laugh, seriously ! You wrote (...people born in Protectorates aren't considered the same way than the ones born in Colonies...) from where did you get that? Is there any law!? Writing guideline in Wiki or somewhere else stating that!!?? So once again where are your proofs!? Same remark when you state that (French people born in pre-1956 Morocco and Tunisia are considered (even officially by the French Gov) as born in these respective countries). Are you serious using this arguments!!?? FRENCH PEOPLE born in Morocco or Tunisia during the protectorate are considered French as they are French. So you mean that a Frenchman born in Morocco is considered to be born in Morocco but the one born in Algeria is considered to be born in France...and you put between parentheses even officially by the French Gov!!! From where did you get that? Any link or source for such statement??? People born in Morocco, even native Moroccans were born under the French jurisdiction, born while France was governing their country, to designate the place where they were born one should use French Morocco, same thing for other north African countries. Now unless you can provide something official from the wiki politics, you MUST also use french morocco, French Tunisia and French Algeria in biographies as well as when designating the territory. Regards Fort-Henry (talk) 23:51, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, sorry but it doesn't fit. And yes, French gov doesn't consider those born in Morocco and Tunisia the same way it considers those born in Algeria.

I have nothing more to say if you can't make the difference between a Colony, a Protectorate and an integral part of a Country. Note that the ICJ considers Protectorates as sovereign, just to make it easier for you to see the difference.

--Omar-toons (talk) 00:01, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus

A consensus has already been reached regarding the article Yves Saint-Laurent and three others. You have been part of the discussion (insisting that the place of birth should be French Algeria and not Algeria) and, later, you did not make any change relative to the place of birth: Algeria, designating the territory. So why did you come after all of that to modify the place of birth in the article Claude from Algeria to French Algeria???? If you accept something you should continue accepting it. And once again, I would like to understand the logical basis of such contributions. Regards. Fort-Henry (talk) 00:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you made a little mixup.

By the way, if you understand French, here's an article explaining the difference between Protectorates, Colonies and France itself (including Algeria) regarding "Citizenship and Nationality" : Christian Bruschi, La nationalité dans le droit colonial, in: Procès, Cahiers d’analyse politique et juridique n° 18, 1987/88

Regards,

--Omar-toons (talk) 00:15, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to write mix-up and not mixup. In such a situation you should use the word confusion as there is no mistake.

You seem to have a problem with Algeria. In the article Yves Saint-Laurent the word Algeria designates also the geographical territory so why you bother yourself insisting on French Algeria? If you do insist (and you do have all the right) it would be the same for French Morocco in the template you keep modifying. Now, if you want to merge Algeria with France in that template, good, just do it...Fort-Henry (talk) 01:42, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template talk:USAAF 12th Air Force World War II

wp:3RR is a "Bright line". Discuss it in talk or take it to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring Jim1138 (talk) 04:53, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI - Done

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Fort-Henry (talk) 16:48, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Listing of de facto national languages

Hi, Omar. I saw this edit. I'm aware that French is not an official language of Morocco. I'm also aware that French is not natively spoken there (then again, neither is Modern Standard Arabic, which is not intelligible with Moroccan Arabic but is one of the official languages of Morocco). Nonetheless, the French name must be put in the lead anyway, because the CIA World Factbook states that French in Morocco is "often the language of business, government, and diplomacy" as can be seen here

Omar, Wikipedia is a tertiary reference. That means it is based on what other sources say about a subject, not about the editor's personal opinions. The CIA World Factbook's designation of French as a de facto national language of Morocco means that Wikipedia must list it in the infobox and in the lead. Also, every country has a national language, or two, or three. They may be official, but they do not have to be. Some countries have unofficial national languages.

I'll be happy to do additional research, but I am confident that it will also say that French is a de facto national language of Morocco and/or that the Moroccan government uses it as a working language in at least some of its ministries.

WhisperToMe (talk) 20:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've worked on Languages_of_Morocco#French. In particular I found some interesting stuff related to Moroccan art and French WhisperToMe (talk) 22:14, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a significant amount of information to the Languages of Morocco article. Please review it. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:20, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, an RFC would be great :) WhisperToMe (talk) 23:40, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting... One source I found that it seems like Moroccans do not define French as a national language - they define three: Standard Arabic, Moroccan Arabic, and Berber. I think Ennaji's survey is quite useful! WhisperToMe (talk) 00:12, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo requests

BTW, do you go to Casablanca sometimes? There is a photo in Casablanca I would like for someone to take WhisperToMe (talk) 00:14, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rarely, but I'll keep it in mind if I go there in the coming days. What photo do you need? --Omar-toons (talk) 18:46, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I need the Royal Air Maroc head office at Casablanca Anfa Airport. Thanks! WhisperToMe (talk) 00:45, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to take some pictures next time I'll be there (wasn't there for a wile btw) --Omar-toons (talk) 01:45, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) WhisperToMe (talk) 03:04, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

USAF template

Hello

Argh, did not get back to ya earlier, I was out in the boonies… For the USAF template, you are not the one decide nor the one to give orders, well, you should not be allowed to. You modify that template after that you want to oblige other contributors to reach a consensus AFTER you have written what you want !!!! What’s that. We will go back to the original text prior to your modification after that we will (I hope) reach a consensus…Do you understand!? PRIOR to your modification and not after. Think you get a first warning, you must be collaborative so I expect you, as a sign of good faith to revert back to the original version. Fort-Henry (talk) 11:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"First warning"? Is this a joke?

Feel free to seek for a consensus on article's TP, but try, before all, to understand what other people made instead of editing the template based only on your POV.

--Omar-toons (talk) 18:39, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think I am joking son!?

The warning was about your impolite and rude statements against other users.

And, try to be cooperative; the article will go prior to your modifications. You modify the original version after that you want to make people think they should respect your will and keep the article as you modified it. Again, this is not your own blog. And, again, try to be cooperative. Fort-Henry (talk) 19:06, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maghrebi Quarter

Hello

We are not done yet for the Maghrebi Quarter, a more deep and wide discussion has to be initiated...Fort-Henry (talk) 11:31, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To discuss what? The fact that you don't agree with what reliable sources say?

Thanks to read WP:OR, WP:POV and WP:V.

--Omar-toons (talk) 18:41, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is as clear as the blue sky to discuss the title Maghrebi Quarter

You provided 4 sources or so and you expect the english reader to base his knowledge on those 4 sources...It is an Encyclopedia not a blog...Fort-Henry (talk) 18:59, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tetouan

Hello

I have seen you have reverted my last contributions. I do not really understand why is that.

The fact that Spanish and French are still widespread especially by the businessmen and intellectual elites needs to be sourced. It may be, of course, obvious for you but not for someone who is not Moroccan.
The section ‘Description’ does not contain any reference, so please, our aim as contributors is to source it so its content can be reliable and not the opposite.

Thanks to be collaborative. Fort-Henry (talk) 16:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel Valls

Hello

Could u please show me where is the source for the statement relative to Valls' family? I may be wrong...

Thanks Fort-Henry (talk) 23:18, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of Salé

Hello

You are insisting on the fact that the Republic of Sale’ was a major piratical port without giving any source…and you deleted twice the tags I added asking to source this information. We can understand from the article that Sale’ was a piratical port but stating that this republic which lasts around 42 years was a major port should be sourced.
Do you want the English speaking reader to consider then to believe that ‘’’ Cultural differences between the native Saletin people and the Morisco refugees, together with language differences led the newcomers to settle in the old Medina of Rabat, on the opposite bank of the Bou Regreg’’’ only because you wrote it!!!??? So please provide sources or simply delete this statement.
If you remove again the tags it will be considered as vandalism.

Fort-Henry (talk) 16:38, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I get it. Fort-Henry (talk) 22:00, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we request your participation in the discussion to help find a resolution. The thread is "Talk:Berber people". Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 17:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Fort-Henry (talk) 22:01, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We seek your participation

As i said before i created another dispute resolution discussion (link to it), hoping you'll do your part to help solving this issue. Regards. -Dzlinker (talk) 13:06, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Hi Omar-toons,

Given the edit summary of this edit, I'd like to remind you to be more civil when editing. An occasional lapse or two is one thing, but this is coming off of a history of complaints and a recent AN/I discussion. There's really not any reason to have had that kind of edit summary, regardless if it was directed at the content or at another editor. Thanks. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues!} 14:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of education, uncooperative, and enmity manifest. Good reasons for a block, be carful. Still a fact: Berlusconi famous escort was born there. Not reverting, counting on your good sense to revert the wise version to the 'stupid' one. Regards. - Dzlinker (talk) 15:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, let me laugh! Coming from a guy who claims being a "Nazi" and a "former SS ", I really don't care...
--Omar-toons (talk) 21:36, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fkih Ben Saleh

Hello

You do not seem to understand that you should not simply erase the content relative to the Moroccan prostitute Karima El Mahroug from the article. What you are doing is vandalism. Do you understand?

Thanks to be collaborative.

Fort-Henry (talk) 01:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reporting. Please to support with any other overtaken policy you noticed. - Dzlinker (talk) 02:18, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notoriety should be proven. Is that a joke? About 486,000 results in Google. Who the hell in the world doesn't know Ruby?

Once again, you do not seem to understand...good Fort-Henry (talk) 11:17, 1 November 2012 (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. Thank you.. Fort-Henry (talk) 12:22, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Native people of Fkih Ben Saleh

Hello,

Please join the discussion here[2], instead of initiating an edit war, please explain why you keep deleting the content relative to Karima El Mahroug. Thanks Fort-Henry (talk) 12:32, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ghomara (tribe)

Hello

Why did you remove the tag asking from sources? The tag will remain unless you provide sources. Clear enough? Fort-Henry (talk) 16:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No prob'! Source given. Actually, it was already on the article, but of course it is easier to put a tag than to copy the ref on the sentence it has to belong to. --Omar-toons (talk) 21:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring

Please read my warning here. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:52, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 4

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.

Ghomara (tribe) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Masmouda

Ghomara language (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Masmouda

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Call for Wikipedians in Residence in Africa

Hello,

I hope you are well and thriving!! WikiAfrica has just put out a call for two Wikipedians in Residence. One in Cape Town at WikiAfrica, at the Africa Centre; and the other for WikiAfrica Cameroon in Douala, at doual’art. If you are interested, please contact either Marilyn [marilyn.doualabelldoualart.org] for the WikiAfrica Cameroon call or Isla [islahfafricacentre.net] for the WikiAfrica position in Cape Town.

If you are not interested in applying, I would be very grateful if you could spread this call far and wide among your networks to ensure that both projects get excellent candidates. Here is the link for the information page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/two-wikipedians-in-residence-for-africa/

Best regards, Islahaddow

(This message was sent using Lucia Bot at 22:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Morocco

Thanks for bringing up my attention to edits in the Morocco articles. I smell some fishy behavior do you think it's a WP:SOCK? Tachfin (talk) 19:29, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prostitution in Morocco, the article

Hello

The article prostitution in Morocco has not been created by Dzlinker, it exists since 2008. Dzlinker moved the content to that article as he did few hours ago by copying the same content in the article prostitution in Africa. No move, no deletion, the section will remain as it is until a consensus is reached. Do you understand ???? Thanks for remaining cooperative. Fort-Henry (talk) 12:32, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Feel free to make a proposal on WP:WPC to change these guidelines.

--Omar-toons (talk) 12:39, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you willing to take the article Morocco for your own. The policy you mentioned gives GUIDELINES, it does not oblige for a specific content! Clear enough? Fort-Henry (talk) 12:41, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Language ref desk topic on official languages

Hi! You might be interested in the thread Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#How_many_official_national_languages_are_there_in_the_world.3F WhisperToMe (talk) 19:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Omar-toons. You have new messages at Talk:Moroccan_Quarter.
Message added 18:11, 27 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dzlinker \,,/(*_*)\,,/ 18:11, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Berber Revolt, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tamesna and Berber (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) 12:05, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of "Ihssan"

Hi Omar, thanks for your edit but i dont agree with you about the translation of Ihssan, i speak arabic and im from morocco, google translate is not accurate Ihssan means Spirituality you can check it on their officiel web site: french : http://www.aljamaa.net/fr/document/1148.shtml english: http://yassine.net/en/document/4856.shtml an other source from Berkley Center : http://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/resources/organizations/justice-and-spirituality-movement-al-adl-wa-al-ihsan --KnightYusuf (talk) 09:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but things don't work like that for two reasons :

first, ihsan can not be translated by "spirituality", but "charity" or "beneficence", and there's no dictionary that actually translates it by "spirituality" ;
second, and the most important thing, the association's name is reported as "justice and charity" on many WP:RS [3][4][5][6].

Thanks for your understanding

Moroccan history articles

Hi Omar-Toons,

I recently (about a month ago) wrote two articles on Moroccan history - one on the History of Marrakesh, another on the Battle of Sidi Bou Othman, that I would appreciate more experienced editors on Moroccan topics like you and Tachfin to take a look at. If you have a few minutes, I would appreciate a quick proof-read for errors and omissions. Thanks in advance. Walrasiad (talk) 02:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Translations into French

Hi Omar, I'm looking for a wikipedist that could be able to translate two image captions in the French Wikipedia. Could you please help me with this and this? Many thanks into advance --Ecemaml (talk) 10:55, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

done :) (yw!)

--Omar-toons (talk) 18:34, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) --Ecemaml (talk) 18:10, 6 February 2013 (UTC) PS: I'm afraid I'll come back with new requests sooner than later[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of former European colonies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spanish North Africa (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) 11:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Western Sahara

You might want to think about posting at WP:MR. I'm not sure what my own view is, but that's probably the place for contesting a merge. Formerip (talk) 10:20, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hello.

I was not copying and pasting. i was putting the information in the right article. The article about Tihamah is so biased and misleading and lacks information. In fact, so many of en wiki articles has a big mistake about the location of Mecca. In most articles, they refer to Mecca as part of Hejaz. This is not true. For centuries, arabic and muslim scholars have regarded Mecca as veing in Tihamah not Hejaz. The mistake in wiki comes from the name of the sharif Kingdom. That inclusion is not based on reliable geographic sources. It was just easy for the kingdom to have one name instead of two. However, the resources I am posting are very old, some of them are 1400 years old, and all of them differentiate between Tihamah and Hejaz. As you can check, I was not just randomly replacing Hejaz with Tihamah in the articles I edited. I replaced it when it was not right and left it when it was right. For example, Medina is in hejaz and I did not touch that. Thank you. --LePatro (talk) 19:03, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you can read Arabic so I'd like you to read this passage of (معجم البلدان) which is one of the oldest Arabic books about the geography of the arabian peninsula. You can see clearly here that Mecca is in Tihamah wheras Medina is in Hejaz --LePatro (talk) 19:15, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make it sound like old. Mecca is regarded as being in Tihamah for centuries until this kingdom of Hejaz that misled everything. Prophet mohammed himself who was born in Mecca said that he is one of the Tihami people not the Hejazi people since he was born in Mecca. I am adding real verifiable sources and I see no reason to delete tem and insisting on the wrong unsourced info. --LePatro (talk) 19:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I will repeat it again : thanks to read WP:V, WP:UNDUE, WP:FRINGE as well as WP:RS, and maybe WP:TRUTH.

So, no matter what a unique source says and what was the place called 14 centuries ago, it is widely accepted and reported by the vast majority of RS that all these topics are related to Hedjaz, not sth called "Timamah", a name that most people never heard.

Thanks for understanding.

--Omar-toons (talk) 19:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit-warring on Flag of Western Sahara. 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 appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. MastCell ^Talk 21:00, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Banu Ghaniya

Hi, Omar-toons! Is it possible to drop the more references needed tag from the Banu Ghaniya article or it needs further clarification? Best regards.--Asqueladd (talk) 20:20, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flag icon

I you want to Wikipedia to use {{noflag}} Western Sahara instead of {{flag|Western Sahara}}, start a discussion (maybe at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Western_Sahara). "unjustified rv" is not a valid reason for ignoring the objection of another editor. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 23:40, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion on April 2

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 User:Omar-toons reported by User:Emmette Hernandez Coleman (Result: ). Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk • contribs) 00:36, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Omar-Toons. You've been making reverts about Western Sahara at a large number of articles, and this qualifies you for an edit-warring block. (From your contribution list, see all of your March 31 edits that contain 'NPOV' in the edit summary). Consider promising to take a one-week break from any article edits regarding SADR, Morocco or the Western Sahara, and the closer of the WP:EW report might take this into account. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:40, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. 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 appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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.

The complete report of this case is at WP:AN3#User:Omar-toons reported by User:Emmette Hernandez Coleman (Result: 48h). Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:53, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on French in Algeria

Omar, you might be interested in this: Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Listing_languages_of_a_country_and_NPOV:_Algeria_and_the_French_language WhisperToMe (talk) 07:05, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you!

Thanks for beautiful additions to Perejil Island Victuallers (talk) 13:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Morocco?

I see you have made various edits to articles on I have contributed to related to medieval Morocco. With respect, I think these edits are confusing modern and medieval concepts.

Geographically, the modern state that is known in English as Morocco roughly corresponds to the region that medieval Arab historians and geographers called Al-Maghrib al Aqsa and medieval European historians called Morroch. I have no problem with using the term "Morocco" in a geographical sense when writing about the medieval period.
Politically, the Almoravids and then the Almohads made their capital at Marrakesh and ruled large parts of modern Morocco, Spain, Portugal, Algeria etc. The successor Marinid state based on Fez varied in extent, but at times covered much of modern Morocco, Algeria and even Tunisia. The heads of the dynasties did not call themselves "king of Morocco", since the term did not yet exist.
The people of the region were mostly Berber, with a steady inflow of Arabs during the middle ages. Although these two ethno-linguistic groups were spread across the Maghreb and beyond, individuals would have identified with their local tribe and region. They would certainly not have identified with any modern state. There were "Moroccan people" only in the sense of people who lived in what is now called Morocco.

The English Wikipedia should follow the terminology that is used by academic sources that discuss the subject.

The region is called Morocco.
The Marinid rulers are mostly identified by dynasty as in "the Marinid ruler Abu Yakub". Their kingdom is often called after the capital, Fez, as in "Sultan of Fez". Sources occasionally describe the extent of the realm as "ruler of Morocco", but do not use terms like "Sultan of Morocco" or "Kingdom of Morocco" since those would be anachronisms.
The people may be called Berbers or Arabs as appropriate. When discussing trade and war, they are mostly named after the ruling dynasty, as "the Marinid forces", or just "the Marinids". Sometimes they are named by city, as "there was rivalry between Tlemcen and Fez". The people are not called "the Moroccans". That would also be an anachronism.

Whether the academic sources are right in their choice of terminology is irrelevant. The English Wikipedia should follow common academic usage. This is to ask that you stop introducing anachronisms like "Sultan of Morocco" that were not used at the time and are not used by modern sources. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:45, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This issue was discussed many times before (since 2007 in the Bokpasa's case on Talk:History of Morocco). :Btw, not all academic sources agree with your interpretation, even most sources disagree as the report the Idrisid dynasty as the founder of the modern Moroccan state, not the "Kingdom of Fez" (which is WP:OR).

Also, quoting myself on the last time this issue was discussed:

btw I find after 10 seconds on Scholar that:
- "tradition (...) reaches back to the origins of the modern Moroccan state in the ninth century Idrisid dynasty which founded the venerable city of. Fes", G Joffe, Morocco: Monarchy, legitimacy and succession, in : Third World Quarterly, 1988
- "The Idrisids, the founder dynasty of Fas and, ideally at least, of the modern Moroccan state (...)", Moroccan dynastic shurfa’‐hood in two historical contexts: idrisid cult and ‘Alawid power in : The Journal of North African Studies Volume 6, Issue 2, 2001 [7]

So, calling medieval Moroccan "Moroccans" is like calling medieval Ottomans "Turks", it is not an anachronism but it is made to make it more understandable to most people. Maybe they weren't called "Moroccans" in English but in Arabic they were called "Maghrebis", as they are still called today.

--Omar-toons (talk) 14:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The origins of modern-day Morocco can be traced back to Mauretania or earlier, but that is not relevant. These articles talk about the western Maghreb in the Marinid period. We should follow the terminology used by academic English-language sources. We can certainly add explanations like "in modern-day Morocco", but should not use terms like "Sultan of Morocco" or "Kingdom of Morocco" since these are anachronistic for rulers of this period. A reasonable compromise would be to give the title as "Marinid Sultan" and describe the realm as something like "ruler of a realm based on Fez that covered most of modern-day Morocco." Aymatth2 (talk) 15:05, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Specific examples: Suleiman the Magnificent was not "Sultan of Turkey". Henry VIII was not "King of Britain". Julius Caesar was not "Emperor of Italy". Historians do not use those titles. Our job is to accurately report what the historians say. Readers do not want our personal views. Aymatth2 (talk) 00:56, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is your personal interpretation, nothing else. Sources say that "the modern Moroccan state was founded in 789", that's all. --Omar-toons (talk) 02:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Britannica: "Marīnid dynasty (...)that replaced Almohad rule in Morocco and, temporarily, in other parts of northern Africa during the 13th–15th century (...) the Marīnids, under Abū Yūsuf Yaʿqūb, became masters of Morocco." (-> As you can read, they say that the Marinids became "masters of Morocco", not "masters of what is now Morocco", as you replaced on many Marinids related articles, which is WP:OR)
Larousse (FR): "Marinides ou Mérinides : Dynastie marocaine (1269-1465)." (="Moroccan dynasty")

Stating that "Morocco didn't exist because the word "Morocco" didn't exist in English in 1330" is WP:OR. Also, your comparison is WP:OR as Italy isn't a political continuity of the Roman Empire, while nowadays Morocco is the political continuity of medieval Morocco (as the French Republic is the continuity of Capetian France, but not of the Gauls).

--Omar-toons (talk) 02:16, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can add these:

"mid-14th century : Morocco began to be established as a distinct separate entity, associated with the cult of the early Muslim leaders in the area, especially Idris I" - D. Lea & A. Row, A political chronology of Africa, p.298
J. D. Fage & R. A. Oliver, The Cambridge History of Africa, Volume 3, pp.354-376 : the authors randomly refer to them as "Sultans of Fez" or "Sultans of Morocco", to the "-in the 2nd half of the 14th century- (...) the three kingdoms of Morocco, Granada and Tlemcen" (p.365), "the Marinids succeeded the Almohads in Morocco" (p.355) (-> see that the authors do not say "in what is now Morocco").

So, unless you can prove that your opinion prevails over the one of these authors, and unless you can seek for a new consensus, the Marinids wills still be referred as "Sultans of Morocco". --Omar-toons (talk) 03:02, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Marinids were rulers of the geographical region called Morocco. Some books do use the title "Sultan of Morocco" for Marinid rulers, but mostly historians avoid the title as an anachronism. The Marinids were not rulers of the Kingdom of Morocco. I do not understand why you are passionate about using this title for the early rulers of the region - but I am not interested in getting into an edit war over such a trivial issue. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:14, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's your personal opinion, and it does NOT prevail over the Larousse encyclopedia, over Fage or over any other WP:RS, that's all. Bring sources explaining that these authors are wrong, we'll discuss the issue after that basing on the WP:NPOV policy, but all I know is that the fact that the Marinids were "Sultans of Morocco" isn NOT WP:FRINGE or WP:UNDUE. --Omar-toons (talk) 20:05, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete the name ⴰⵎⵕⵕⵓⴽ from Morocco? What was wrong? 83.8.253.175 (talk) 13:32, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

As I've explained, sources need to be on the topic. For a linguistic claim, you need linguistic sources. At least take it to talk. Continuing to edit war is a good way to get blocked. — kwami (talk) 02:08, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You don't even give a single source. Ethnologue is not a WP:RS. --Omar-toons (talk) 02:10, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The source is the same for all the articles. I didn't think I needed to spell it out in the info box, since it was already spelled out in the text, but now I have.

I'm not saying it's the final word, only that it's a linguistic source on the classification of Berber. You should have something at least as good to counter it. The one you've been using is not a linguistic ref, and only speaks of a hypothesis based on toponyms, from who knows where. — kwami (talk) 02:14, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First, seems that you didn't even open the link to the second source that I gave, otherwise you would see that it is a specialized source... also, BRILL's encyclopedia (the fist reference given) is a highly trusted WP:RS ;

Second, this is not a WP:RS: even its author says that it is a preliminary list and that there are still many problems and I would be grateful for further additions and emendations (first paragraph, first page!!!). --Omar-toons (talk) 02:51, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That only means that he's honest. I'll take a look at your 2nd source.

Oh, I had taken a look at your 2nd source, and dismissed it. Religion isn't the same thing as language. — kwami (talk) 03:21, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Religion? Where do you see that it talks about religion? --Omar-toons (talk) 03:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry, I just undrstood: you didn't even try to know what's BRILL's encyclopedia, you just read the title :D. Seriously, assuming good faith after that wouldn't be easy... --Omar-toons (talk) 03:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming good faith isn't easy if you don't practice it yourself. You're evidently not worth the time it's taking me to write this, so goodbye. And come up with an actual reason for your tags, or the come down. — kwami (talk) 05:26, 27 October 2013 (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. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:42, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of former sovereign states, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bougie (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) 09:17, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish protectorate in Morocco

You left our talk unfinished. The current text is still the old one. So, there is no agreement on the current text. Can we get down to do some serious work on this?--Megustalastrufas (talk) 20:29, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Dark Sun (talk) 15:33, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited SNVI, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constantine (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) 09:04, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Started article on Language Attitudes Among Arabic-French Bilinguals in Morocco

Hi! I started an article on the Language Attitudes Among Arabic-French Bilinguals in Morocco. Do you want me to send you a copy of the second book review I used as a source (I don't know what happened to the first one)? WhisperToMe (talk) 02:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article idea: Lycée Paul Gauguin in Agadir, Morocco

Are you interested in starting Lycée Français Paul Gauguin in Agadir, Morocco? I found some sources:

"Agadir: Le collège Paul Gauguin menacé de fermeture." L′économiste. Édition N° 3962 du 2013/02/06.
Union des Conseils de Parents d’Elèves du Maroc – Conseil des Parents d’Elèves Agadir. "Agadir : les enjeux réels de la fermeture du Lycée Paul Gauguin" (Archive). La Voix de France. Friday 24 January 2014.
Official site: http://www.efmaroc.org/gauguin/index.php (is http://www.lyceefrancaisagadir.org/ a different school?)
http://www.lyceefrancaisagadir.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CR-r%C3%A9union-2-f%C3%A9vrier-Agadir.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/6PYzsHN1T

WhisperToMe (talk) 10:40, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Occupation v. annexation

Hi Omar-toons! The last thing that I would want to happen is an edit war, I so I am happy to discuss any differences we might have. In my opinion there are several topics on which we differ and I will list them from I what I perceptive to be the least to the most difficult to reconcile:

(1) This edit where you removed the Jordanian occupation from List of military occupations. The Jordanian actions in this case consisted of both an occupation and annexation, so it should be on the list even under your view of things (i.e. Jordan began occupying in 1948, but did not annex until 1950).
(2) This and this edit where I removed claims and sources from both Military occupation and List of military occupations. There are several claims and sources to which I object:
- (1.A) "During civil wars, the districts occupied by rebels are considered to be foreign." – This may have been the case 100 years ago when the source for this claim was written, but now the law has changed after the adoption of the Geneva Conventions and the distinction between international armed conflicts and non-international armed conflicts. Today international law only recognizes that foreign territory can be occupied.
- (1.B) "The intended temporary nature of occupation, when no claim for permanent sovereignty is made by the occupying entity, distinguishes occupation from annexation." – This may be the case colloquially, but "occupation" and "annexation" are as legal terms in these articles. Under international law, territory cannot be annexed, thus any purported annexation is an occupation under international law (see the ICRC, p. 9, "The annexation of conquered territory is prohibited by international law. This necessarily means that if one State achieves power over parts of another State’s territory by force or threat of force, the situation must be considered temporary by international law.") In other words, a state may claim that it was annexed territory, and for purposes of domestic law it is annexed, but under intentional law that can never be the case.
- (1.B) The sources include Eyal Benvenisti's The International Law of Occupation, which is used to support the above quoted statement. However, Benvenisti appears to argue that there is little distinction between annexation and occupation. The table of contents, which can be viewed via Amazon.com, show that he categorizes annexations under occupations (page xi).
- (1.C) The last source is an article from the Journal of Peace Research, "Socio-Psychological Implications for an Occupying Society: The Case of Israel", which is written by psychologists and does not seem to be an authoritative source on the laws of war.
(3) The last issue is this edit were you removed Western Sahara from the list of current occupied territories on List of military occupations. I do not have additional arguments beyond what I have already written. Under international law, annexations are illegal. Thus any instance of an annexation is a belligerent occupation. – Zntrip 00:08, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

In all these cases, including a territory in a list depends on the definition of "Military occupation" and "annexation". A central point is the fact that, in the case of a military occupation, there's no claim to sovereignty over the territory (Edelstein p.52). Thus, for both the West Bank and Western Sahara cases, Jordan and Morocco had/has this kind of claims and granted the inhabitants their respective citizenship, which isn't the case, for example, for the Israeli link with the West Bank.

Then, per definition, this case also applies to Crimea and Golan, nonobstant the fact that these annexations are illegal regarding international law. Per se, We're talking here about Illegal annexations: illegal but annexations, different from military occupations.

Endorsing the opinion that these annexations are military occupations aren't WP:NPOV as this is a claim generally made by one side of the conflict, and Wikipedia has to show facts, not opinions.

Btw, I'm not really aware of the West Bank case, and I can't argue more than that. However, concerning the Western Sahara case, the term "military occupation" is only used by one side of that conflict (ie: the Polisario front) and is no more used by the UN since the 80's, and the territory isn't controlled by the military but by civil bodies. And, since the are a lot of edit-wars on Wikipedia concerning that issue the best way to prevent them is by using neutral wording (ie: WP:NPOV), that's why using the word "control" instead of "occupation" or "annexation" is, imho, maybe not the more NPOV but, at least, the less POV.

Note: the references that you deleted from the article Military occupation weren't "recent" but added and discussed some 2 years ago.

Regards,

--Omar-toons (talk) 01:27, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies with regard to the edit summary. I mistakenly thought I was editing "List of military occupations" at the time. You are correct, they were added much earlier.

I think our divergence of opinion is due to a difference in interpretation of the phrases "occupation" and "annexation." You are of the view that they are mutually exclusive cases: a situation is either an occupation or an annexation. My understanding is that there is overlap, that is, all annexations are occupations. I'm approaching this purely from a legal perspective. The following quote from the Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law's entry on "Annexation" may be helpful:

"Since, under present international law, annexations are unlawful and do not constitute a valid title to territory, any exercise of sovereign authority by the annexing State concerning the population of the annexed territory would, in principle, seem to be legally null and void unless it could also be effected on a different legal basis. Since annexations are, as a rule, the result of military occupation, the legal situation of the inhabitants of the annexed territory would, in principle, be governed by the rules of belligerent occupation and occupation after armistice, respectively."

Since this appears to be what the law is, I don't see why this would be considered POV. Additionally, "occupation" and "annexation" both have negative connotations, so I don't see why "annexation" is any less POV than "occupation". If there are POV concerns, as there evidently are with respect to Western Sahara, would it not be an amicable solution to simply explain the nuances of the different perspectives? For example, if Western Sahara where to be included in the list, there could be a disclaimer that its status as an occupied territory is disputed or contested. – Zntrip 01:56, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maghrebian community of Paris

I started the article Maghrebian community of Paris. You may be interested in it! WhisperToMe (talk) 16:10, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Barbary States

As someone who has done a significant amount of research on this issue for a number of years i find your assertion that the Algiers, Tripoli, and Tunis were under control of the ottoman empire quite laughable. The three "provinces" as you call them were defacto independent states and only nominal vassals of the ottoman empire in that they paid tribute (or another view might be a tax) to the empire once a year and recognized the emperor as caliph. In all other regards they conducted independent policy, they declared war on states that were at peace with the empire, conducted treaties on their own behalf, and in all regards acted like independent states. You have not provided any source that rebuffs this assertion, which was sourced in the text of the First Barbary War article before you changed it.XavierGreen (talk) 02:52, 5 June 2014 (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. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:41, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

At this point I'm inclined to semi-protect the page and block you for edit warring. Please comment at AN3 why you think you should not be sanctioned. I don't promise that another admin will not take action in the interim.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:44, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pan-Arab colors

Are you willing to engage (here or on the Talk page in question) in a cordial discussion about how to resolve these persistent issues?

If yes, I will try to put aside the negativity of the past and work with you in as constructive and friendly a way as possible.

Please have a think about it and inform me if you agree with this approach. 2.28.240.160 (talk) 17:09, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at Pan-Arab colors. 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 appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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. Bbb23 (talk) 17:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File talk:Mapa del sur de España neutral.png

An IP has said that there's a mistake on this picture. Could you check/fix it please? George8211 / T 16:23, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 8

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 Transports. 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) 09:21, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ottoman Algeria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beylerbeylik. 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) 09:19, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tekna

hello, I would like to publish your map on the territory of Tekna in a publication, a chapter in a forthcoming book. I need a better definition and, moreover, I'd quote you directly. Do you think this is possible? sincerely 90.0.151.163 (talk) 18:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I drew my map basing on A. Gaudio's one (Attilio Gaudio, Les populations du Sahara occidental: histoire, vie et culture, KARTHALA Editions (1993), p.103), and I think that it could be more appropriate to cite the original one rather than mine.

Btw, I don't know how does "copyright things" work but I think that it would be fine as long as it is fine for the original publisher.

Regards,

--Omar-toons (talk) 00:51, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Apologies for my post on your talk page - I clicked on the wrong editor's "talk page" link. Self administering upper-cuts momentarily. All the best. Anotherclown (talk) 11:57, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Principality of Debdou, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berber. 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) 11:29, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Air transports of heads of state and government, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grumman Gulfstream. 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) 10:17, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

irrelevant !!

hi

i do not see this internal link "Independence Day (Algeria)" is irrelevant to "List of colonial heads of Algeria"

(The dialectic of colonialism and independence)

--محمد بوعلام عصامي «Md.Boualam» (talk) 17:27, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution

You are party to a dispute. Please be kind enough to give your opinion here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Caliphate — Preceding unsigned comment added by FreeatlastChitchat (talk • contribs) 07:30, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RE; Constant Revert Resolution on Caliphate talk page

Hello Omar-toons. FreeatlastChitchat has proposed an alternative to the current wording on the issue being discussed in the caliphate talk page. Please could you provide your thoughts on the matter there. Thank you. Mbcap (talk) 00:14, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Three of the four editors have agreed on the removal of disputed content as there are no sources which support it. thank you for helping in the discussion.FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:36, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ottoman Algeria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Agha. 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) 09:16, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally

I formally request that you apologize to user:M.Bitton for having suspected him of being a sockpuppet. That SPI has cleared him, and he's still hurt by it. He says it won't change anything, but I feel it's worth a try. DS (talk) 00:56, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After some coaxing and cajoling, I got him to trim out the accusatory parts from his apology. Good enough? DS (talk) 04:19, 24 February 2015 (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. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chemsdine-badouri (talk • contribs) 19:02, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

...a discussion which closed with C-b being blocked and the SPI being reopened. WP:BOOMERANG, so no need to worry. Bencherlite ^Talk 20:02, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hilalian dialects, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constantine. 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) 08:59, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Complaint about you at WP:AN3

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Omar-toons reported by User:Kaiyr (Result: ). The other party claims you were edit warring at Languages of Morocco. You may respond if you wish. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 02:38, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

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.

Central Asian Arabic

added a link pointing to Khorasan

Jebli Arabic

added a link pointing to Berber

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ghassul SPI

Hi. I've re-opened the SPI you started at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ghassul. You'll probably spot something that I've missed. :-) Thanks, Dai Pritchard (talk) 11:17, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Asilah SPI

Hi Omar-toons, you may have noticed or not, I started an investigation on Asilah1981 after the Carlstak SPI. I confess that before spotting irregular behaviour and intervening on the Morisco article (dodgy summary lines, removal of perceived inconvenient content/sources, etc.), do not know what was happening there, or who the editors were. I urge you to go through my evidence and participate by adding what you may know at Asilah SPI. Regards Iñaki LL (talk) 21:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Moroccan Arabic, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Chaouia and Gharb. 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) 09:09, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Western Morocco Arabic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gharb. 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) 09:20, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:International schools in Morocco

Do you know of any more international schools in Morocco? I started Template:International schools in Morocco. You can add some more to the list if you want. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish international schools

While this is not quite related to Morocco, do you know where a list of Spanish international schools and/or their websites are? I would like to know which cities in Europe and Latin America have Spanish schools. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:59, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@WhisperToMe: Hello,

There is a link to "Centros en el Exterior" on https://www.educacion.gob.es/centros/home.do

Regards :-)

--Omar-toons (talk) 23:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Barghawata, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tamesna. 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) 09:40, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ottoman Caliphate

Hello, I am writing this due to your recent edit at Template:Caliphate. Just as it has now been fixed in other main articles on Wikipedia including Ottoman Caliphate, the Ottomans started claiming to Caliphate from the reign of Murad I. The other claim i.e. 1517 (Selim I) was unsourced. We should not use unsourced info on Wikipedia. Just because Ottomans were not Arabs does not make them unworthy of being caliphs when we have sources that they were accepted as caliphs. Khestwol (talk) 05:47, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Khestwol,

This issue was already discussed on Talk:Caliphate#Ottoman Caliphate and you didn't reach any consensus in favor of the edit you made.

Once a new consensus is found, you can then edit the article according to you point of view ; however, without consensus, editing articles that way is disruptive.

Regards,

--Omar-toons (talk) 05:51, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

you should have objected to it in that section, or on talk pages. Edit-warring is not a good option. Khestwol (talk) 06:03, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did, and I wasn't the only one to object.

Btw, I was the one who added dates to the article and now I realize that it was not a good idea, now I removed them (as suggested by Neil on the talk).

--Omar-toons (talk) 06:05, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok that is good. The dates were a bit problematic, I agree. Khestwol (talk) 06:09, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest we also remove the dates from the template. Then we may have a consensus. Khestwol (talk) 06:10, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's a good idea, the dates make ppl understand why there are "parallel" caliphates. However, I think that we could replace "Ottoman Caliphate (1453–1517)" by "Ottoman Caliphate (before 1517)" on the "Parallel Caliphates" section of the template? --Omar-toons (talk) 06:15, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree with replacing the Ottoman Caliphate at all. Considering that the Abbasid dynasty appears to have no influence since the 14th century. Anyway I went ahead and made this suggested changed. I do not think Ottomans needs to be mentioned twice. Best regards, Khestwol (talk) 06:22, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Folks, history isn't a matter of WP editors' consensus. Read some articles from real encyclopaedias, history books, whatever, but smth. with a real base of knowledge behind it. The family name of a puppet installed by an all-powerful sultan doesn't make a caliphate. It's not up to a group of nice people agreeing with each other to declare caliphates retroactively. WP declared it's not about "truth" because that's a subjective term, not because it's about rediscussing historic realities/hist. truth. This is NOT an exercise in democracy.Arminden (talk) 00:52, 12 May 2015 (UTC)Arminden[reply]

@Arminden: Editors of other encyclopedias were in a more disadvantaged position (this was prior to the internet age). By the way they probably had discussions like this but they were behind closed doors, and nobody knew about them. Well, in the age of Encarta stopping production and Britannica going online only, Wikipedia is becoming the encyclopedia.

Now it is true that we need to rely on the highest quality sources. Using the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/noticeboard is a way to go.

WhisperToMe (talk) 06:43, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, but are you joking? if yes, you're hitting the nerve. but if god forbid u aren't, then there is no hope at the end of the bullshit tunnel. historians holding conferences vs. pensioned gardeners, over-energetic archivists and frustrated students? and the latter are our hope? i'm so out of here!

@Arminden: The public clearly believes that an encyclopedia by "pensioned gardeners, over-energetic archivists and frustrated students" is perfectly fine, and for that matter "historians holding conferences" also participate with them, and I'm certain these "historians holding conferences" like it that way. :)

The "pensioned gardeners, over-energetic archivists and frustrated students" have access to every single thing the historians do, and they use the historians' work to build the encyclopedia. That's the point of an encyclopedia, to summarize research.

WhisperToMe (talk) 13:45, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

the facts are far different from your rosy dream, sorry to be so blunt. i've been witness time & again how editors and "administrators" have decided when antiquity starts, what deserves to be called a caliphate, what is a water wheel, etc., etc., while all those terms are well defined by learned historians, technicians, specialists of every type. no need for wp self-elected know-alls to redo those definitions. trying to remove their bullshit leads to blockings and alike, because "democracy" and idiotic rules are thought to be more important than the most basic respect for science and knowledge. any stubborn editor, and definitely any gang of consenting 2-3 of them, can stop any true point be introduced, because energetic opposition is in most cases stronger than established science. i'm talking wp reality, not wishful thinking.
wp editors a] do NOT have access to every (even basic) source, easily 90% of all quotes are restricted to google books, thus to small arbitrary selections; b] they are in their majority hobby editors, with little if any academic background in the specific field they are editing in. that is so obvious that contradicting it means you didn't pay attention to what is happening here. nobody pretends otherwise actually. anybody from, say, macedonia believes to be a historian qualified in all matters macedonian. in the best of cases, people learn how to respect wp citation rules, and then use their own logic. which is not enough when it comes to even slightly more complicated or disputed topics. also, without one single, qualified chief-editor per article who gives a structure and direction to it, even if others contribute, wp pages will always just be juxtapositions of disparate bits of info, with strongly varying relevance and degrees of accuracy. i've seen loads of excellent bits of information being removed and disappearing forever because smb. felt like it and the ones who introduced them despairing and stopping to waste their time on wp. and i've seen SO many idiotic, low- to no-iq edits, that now i'm also giving up.
the "public" accepts anything that's for free, that's a fact, from free newspapers to any free or reduced merchandise, and definitely free info, like wp. i will always take a look at wp when i need a quick info, but staying very much aware that it's a hobby project, not to be trusted beyond that. should you have the energy to reform wp, introducing some means of filtering out ambitious idiots, say by blocking out such who do more than, say, 3 brainless edits even if they are not tagged as vandalism or alike, then all the power to you. but as it is designed now, wp can only be a hobby project with all the flaws of an amateurish effort, which is perfectly fine and more than enough in most cases, but not more than that. w/o giving professionals a last word in fixing and polishing even the best of wp's articles, wp can never be what you seemingly wish it to be. as things stand now, good luck & goodbye.Arminden (talk) 22:14, 10 June 2015 (UTC)Arminden[reply]

1. "the facts are far different from your rosy dream, sorry to be so blunt. i've been witness time & again how editors and "administrators" have decided when antiquity starts, what deserves to be called a caliphate, what is a water wheel, etc., etc., while all those terms are well defined by learned historians, technicians, specialists of every type. no need for wp self-elected know-alls to redo those definitions."

In my experience all the data about "what deserves to be called a caliphate, what is a water wheel, etc., etc." entirely originates from published, reliable sources which provide these definitions. If you see otherwise, please link to talk page discussions and highlight the most pertinent information while also allowing everyone to see the context. If this isn't done, your grievances won't be resolved and all you have are unsubstantiated accusations. Please don't fall into this trap.

2. "wp editors a] do NOT have access to every (even basic) source, easily 90% of all quotes are restricted to google books, thus to small arbitrary selections;"

WP:RX. Wikipedia editors have ways of getting whole sources. Trust me on that. In fact Google Books usually allows seeing the context (in full preview you can see the whole page!). The problem with only seeing a little bit lies with Google Books "snippets".

3. "they are in their majority hobby editors, with little if any academic background in the specific field they are editing in. that is so obvious that contradicting it means you didn't pay attention to what is happening here."

It's not necessary to be a fully decorated academic. This is editing an encyclopedia, a general reference work. The bulk of the editors can be high school and undergraduate college students, who are educated enough to write decent prose and in contact with more experienced academics and teachers, and yet also have the free time to edit. All the experts you talk about in likelihood don't have a lot of free time. They can, and do, get involved whenever there is a dispute. You may want to look into Citizendium and what happened to it.

4. "i've seen loads of excellent bits of information being removed and disappearing forever because smb. felt like it and the ones who introduced them despairing and stopping to waste their time on wp. and i've seen SO many idiotic, low- to no-iq edits" - You want to get more editors, not less. Make it easier for high school and college students to become editors and not get chased off so they can patrol.

5. Wikipedia's purpose is to link you to the real sources. Of course you aren't supposed to directly cite Wikipedia.

WhisperToMe (talk) 17:03, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Modèle:Palette Lycées français du Maroc

On the French Wikipedia I found fr:Modèle:Palette Lycées français du Maroc. Do you think it should be expanded to be like Template:International schools in Morocco? WhisperToMe (talk) 06:45, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a separated fr:Modèle:Palette Lycées internationaux au Maroc should be created there and the old template kept for French lycées.

Btw, feel free to expand the FR template, I think that there's no prob' for that ;)

--Omar-toons (talk) 15:38, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Went ahead and expanded the FR template (fr:Modèle:Palette Lycées internationaux du Maroc), linking it to the English one. WhisperToMe (talk) 11:28, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Malhun, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. this is uncited, and deleted per wp:burden; do not restore it without complying with wp:burden by providing inline citations that fully support the text. Epeefleche (talk) 05:31, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 25

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.

Chiadma

added a link pointing to Berber

Western Morocco Arabic

added a link pointing to Gharb

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Koine

Hi Omar, thanks for providing a source in the edit summary. However, if you're going to add that term in the navbox, please also add the sourced information in the articles. Right now, articles that you've described as koines either do not mention the term at all, or only mention it in passing with a single unsourced sentence. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 11:00, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Abjiklam:,

Thanks for your message.

Actually, I was thinking about adding to their respective articles that "Moroccan Arabic", "Tunisian Arabic" and "Algerian Arabic" are actually cover terms for many varieties of Arabic spoken in each country, often belonging to different dialectal groups, but I need to take some time to find sources for these statements. The articles for Moroccan and Tunisian Arabic already say that they are not single languages but a set of varieties, and imho they should be all (then, for Algerian too) reorganized that way.

Regards,

--Omar-toons (talk) 13:08, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a good idea! Good luck with your research. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 13:33, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend that you seek consensus on the talk pages of the articles that are already far advanced (I am especially referring to Tunisian Arabic that we are trying to nominate to Featured Article). That said, I already disprove the changes that you made, for instance Tunisian is a set of mutually intelligible dialects and since Tunisia is the most linguistically homogeneous state of the Maghreb. That clearly cannot be treated the same as with the situation of the other countries.Tounsimentounes (talk) 17:42, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also I approve your common culture point of view, but that should not start going against WP:NPOV, the aim is to provide a top level of wikipedia article and I believe that would go against it.

ANI notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Topic ban proposal for Omar-toons. Thank you. Huon (talk) 15:56, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war notification

Your recent editing history at Sand War 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. M.Bitton (talk) 02:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Sand War. You seem to go against clear consensus established at the Talk Page of the said article. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 12:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (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. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.Bitton (talk • contribs) 22:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring, as you did at Sand War. 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 appeal this block 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. slakr^\ talk / 00:49, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked again, now for doing the same kind of thing on Algerian War. Omar-toons, you do not seem to understand that your future on en-Wikipedia is in the balance. Drmies (talk) 23:05, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Drmies: Ahm, unless I've got blocked two times for the same reason, there was no 3RR on Algerian War, and if you check its history log you will see that I only reverted once a POV editing (as it can easily be seen on its talk page). I will not ask for an unblock btw.
- note that Blaue Max (talk · contribs) had to deal with the same POV editing a few monthas ago. --Omar-toons (talk) 15:30, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Dear Omar-toons, I didn't block you for a 3R violation, not even really for POV editing, but for edit warring and disrupting. Please see the ANI thread. If you have anything you want to add there, you can post it here and I'll copy it to ANI. Alternately, I don't mind unblocking you on the condition that you only comment in the ANI thread and not edit elsewhere. I am very interested in you continuing to partake in this discussion, in which you have no defenders yet. (Well, this block is about to expire.) I have to tell you, though, that continuing this style of editing will only lead to more of the same. That would be a shame, since you clearly have expertise in an area that attracts few editors, and I am grateful for your work there--but your zeal appears to get you into hot water. (I am not familiar with Blaue Max; for now, I am interested in you.) Thank you, Drmies (talk) 15:43, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - That's what I said : blocked twice for the same thing...
      Now, if it is about my edits on Algerian War, you can check article's history for the period starting Jan. 2015, where POV edits were continually reverted by me and Blaue Max (talk · contribs), and also by Swarm (talk · contribs), Amortias (talk · contribs) and Brigade Piron (talk · contribs)--Omar-toons (talk) 17:11, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I must say that I quit following the Algerian War topic a few month ago due to repeated vandalisms over a very long period of time by the same users/puppets ... Blaue Max (talk) 12:34, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ibn Battuta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mansa. 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) 09:04, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Huon (talk) 07:58, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Additional reasons include your ceaseless POV-pushing which routinely includes misrepresentations of references and mistranslations of foreign-language terms, with the latest examples I know of here and here. I'll bring up the block for review at WP:AN/I in case someone should feel I'm too involved to block someone who was socking for years and misrepresenting sources and faking content for about as long. Huon (talk) 11:05, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I discussion is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Block of Omar-toons. Huon (talk) 11:11, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking me while being involved in a content dispute with me here? What about impartiality?

Seriously, I won't even ask for an unblock...

Thank you, anyways. --Omar-toons (talk) 12:40, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"While"? Strange, I can't remember editing the Sand War article since November. Besides, that's why I brought it up for a review at AN/I. Huon (talk) 14:26, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, the two diffs you provided for my edits on Spanish protectorate in Morocco are sourced ; maybe they can be discussed, but your action (blocking me pretending it is a POV-Pushing) is, imho, irresponsible. You could have discussed it with other admins, I would have accept, but you didn't, and THAT just makes me believe that it is a personal matter rather than administrative..

Good luck.

--Omar-toons (talk) 15:54, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Huon: One last question (or two) : Since other admins disagree with you on your accusation of sockpuppetry, the last thing standing is you believing that I'm a POV-pusher. Then, did you ever reported these pretended POV-pushing cases to WP:NPOVN? Did you ever discussed them there? Or is your accusation based on your own opinion?

I think that I will rather ask for an unblock depending on your answer...

--Omar-toons (talk) 13:14, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No one has disagreed with the fact that you were editing despite another account having been globally locked. In fact, I got thanked for blocking you. Also, I'd say misrepresentations of sources and mistranslations of foreign-language terms are worse enough on their own because they deliberately damage the integrity of the encyclopedia. Our readers should not need to double-check the references you add to see whether they happen to actually say what you claim they say - or whether you're inserting falsehoods and then try to pass them off as true by adding a bogus source. If this were a one-off, I'd have considered it possibly an accident, but for you that's a routine method of editing. And yes, your falsifications of facts were reported to AN/I before. Huon (talk) 13:38, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I though, you did never report these supposed "POV-pushing" issues to WP:NPOVN, you just considered it by yourself.

Thanks for your answer, anyways. --Omar-toons (talk) 14:29, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Misrepresentation of sources and mistranslations are not issues for the NPOV noticeboard. I need not go into a discussion on why you do so; that you do so is obvious enough, and even if it were not in support of a specific POV (which I doubt) those would still be grounds for a block. That's entirely within admin discretion; if other admins disagree, AN/I is the appropriate place to discuss it. Huon (talk) 19:05, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The right place to discuss it... after the blocking?

Just recognize that you blocked me basing on your own opinion rather than anything else. Is that too hard?

--Omar-toons (talk) 15:03, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a community ban that would require obtaining a consensus before imposing it. As I said, blocking an editor who deliberately and repeatedly compromies the integrity of the encyclopedia is entirely within an individual admin's rights (and duties). Huon (talk) 09:51, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Contests

User:Dr. Blofeld has created Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Omar-toons. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfroCine: Join us for the Months of African Cinema in October!

Greetings!

You are receiving this message because your username or portal was listed as a participant of a WikiProject that is related to Africa, the Carribean, Cinema or theatre.

This is to introduce you to a new Wikiproject called AfroCine. This new project is dedicated to improving the Wikipedia coverage of the history, works, people, places, events, etc, that are associated with the cinema, theatre and arts of Africa, African countries, the carribbean, and the diaspora. If you would love to be part of this or you're already contributing in this area, kindly list your name as a participant on the project page here.

Furthermore, In the months of October and November, the WikiProject is organizing a global on-wiki contest and edit-a-thon tagged: The Months of African Cinema. If you would love to join us for this exciting event, also list your username as a participant for this event here. In preparation for the contest, please do suggest relevant articles that need to be created or expanded in different countries, during this event!

If you have any questions, complaints, suggestions, etc., please reach out to me personally on my talkpage! Cheers!--Jamie Tubers (talk) 20:50, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema!

Greetings!

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which has been dedicated to improving contents that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora.

This is a global online edit-a-thon, which is happening in at least 5 language editions of Wikipedia, including the English Wikipedia! Join us in this exciting venture, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section, if you haven't done so already.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing Users who are able to achieve the following:

Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
Country Winners
Diversity winner
High quality contributors
Gender-gap fillers
Page improvers
Wikidata Translators

For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 22:50, 03 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfroCine: Join the Months of African Cinema this October!

Greetings!

After a successful first iteration of the “Months of African Cinema” last year, we are happy to announce that it will be happening again this year, starting from October 1! In the 2018 edition of the contest, about 600 Wikipedia articles were created in at least 8 languages. There were also contributions to Wikidata and Wikimedia commons, which brought the total number of wikimedia pages created during the contest to over 1,000.

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which have been dedicated to creating and improving content that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora. Join us in this global edit-a-thon, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing participants in the following manner:

Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
Diversity winner
Gender-gap fillers

For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

request meeting @HfedBo:.

Hi My friend

I live in Casablanca. Please lets meet. I know many things about Morocco and you as well. Shall we have an inbox talk

Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by HfedBo (talk • contribs)

@HfedBo: You are posting to a sockpuppet's talk page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:18, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can I post on his talk interface — Preceding unsigned comment added by HfedBo (talk • contribs) 08:47, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Omar-toons How can we reach out in Casablanca. Send me message on the private inbox of Wikipedia. I don't know how it workd — Preceding unsigned comment added by HfedBo (talk • contribs) 22:45, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

request meeting II @HfedBo:

Hy Omar,

Will be pleased to meet you. How can we do?

All the best @HfedBo:

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!

Greetings!

The AfroCine Project invites you to join us again this October and November, the two months which are dedicated to improving content about the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora.

Join us in this exciting venture, by helping to create or expand contents in Wikimedia projects which are connected to this scope. Kindly list your username under the participants section to indicate your interest in participating in this contest.

We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:

Overall winner
- 1st - $500
- 2nd - $200
- 3rd - $100
Diversity winner - $100
Gender-gap fillers - $100
Language Winners - up to $100*

We would be adding additional categories as the contest progresses, along with local prizes from affiliates in your countries. For further information about the contest, the prizes and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. Looking forward to your participation.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 19:22, 22nd September 2020 (UTC)

Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!

Greetings,

Thank you very much for participating in the Months of African Cinema global contest/edit-a-thon, and thank you for your contributions so far.

It is already the middle of the contest and a lot have been achieved already! We have been able to get over 1,500 articles created in over fifteen (15) languages! This would not have been possible without your support and we want to thank you. If you have not yet listed your name as a participant in the contest page please do so.

Please make sure to list the articles you have created or improved in the article achievements' section of the contest page, so that they can be easily tracked. To be able to claim prizes, please also ensure to list your articles on the users by articles page. We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:

Overall winner
- 1st - $500
- 2nd - $200
- 3rd - $100
Diversity winner - $100
Gender-gap filler - $100
Language Winners - up to $100*

We are very excited about what has been achieved so far, but your contributions are still needed to further exceed all expectations! Let’s create more articles before the end of this contest, which is this November!!!

Thank you once again for being part of this global event! --Jamie Tubers (talk) 10:30, 06 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

About the Lisan Al Gharb Article

Hello sir

Please i was looking for the reference of " It was closely related to Tashelhit. " but i couldnt find the book. Can you please tell me a library where i can find it ?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayour2002 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

My friend. I have tried to reach you many times. You are a great Moroccan contributor to Wikipedia. I would love to meet you.

Join me on 00212 660120458

Hafid Boutaleb HfedBo (talk) 11:47, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!

Greetings!

The AfroCine Project core team is happy to inform you that the Months of African Cinema Contest is happening again this year in October and November. We invite Wikipedians all over the world to join in improving content related to African cinema on Wikipedia!

Please list your username under the participants’ section of the contest page to indicate your interest in participating in this contest. The term "African" in the context of this contest, includes people of African descent from all over the world, which includes the diaspora and the Caribbean.

The following prizes would be recognized at the end of the contest:

Overall winner
- 1st - $500
- 2nd - $200
- 3rd - $100
Diversity winner - $100
Gender-gap fillers - $100
Language Winners - up to $100*

Also look out for local prizes from affiliates in your countries or communities! For further information about the contest, the prizes and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. We look forward to your participation.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 23:20, 30th September 2021 (UTC)

Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!

Greetings,

It is already past the middle of the contest and we are really excited about the Months of African Contest 2021 achievements so far! We want to extend our sincere gratitude for the time and energy you have invested. If you have not yet participated in the contest, it is not too late to do it. Please list your username as a participant on the contest’s main page.

Please remember to list the articles you have improved or created on the article achievements' section of the contest page so they can be tracked. In order to win prizes, be sure to also list your article in the users by articles. Please note that your articles must be present in both the article achievement section on the main contest page, as well as on the Users By Articles page for you to qualify for a prize.

We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:

Overall winner
- 1st - $500
- 2nd - $200
- 3rd - $100
Diversity winner - $100
Gender-gap filler - $100
Language Winners - up to $100*

Thank you once again for your valued participation! --Jamie Tubers (talk) 18:50, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list