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

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

Learn more about editing

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

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

Get help at the Teahouse

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

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! SuperMarioOdyssy101 (talk) 03:26, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you) Algirr (talk) 03:27, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Algirr! Your additions to Ba'athist Syria have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

• Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
• Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
• Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's eligibility.
• Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 14:19, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Ba'athist Syria has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Diannaa (talk) 17:02, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am Diannaa and I am a Wikipedia administrator. Prose you find online, in books, in magazines, and in newspapers is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the copyright policy of this website to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. The Wikipedia copyright policy and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policy. There's a simplified version of our copyright rules at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. --Diannaa (talk) 12:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in the Syrian Civil War and ISIL. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Cinderella157 (talk) 00:42, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is a problem? I am added collage of photos for that topic, and I did not vandalize this page. I thought that Wikipedia rules allowed editing of articles. Algirr (talk) 03:33, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message. Cinderella157 (talk) 12:12, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oh, Okay Algirr (talk) 16:29, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By replacing the map in the infobox, you have reverted the work of another editor. Your edit was challenged and reverted but you reinstated it here, less than 24 hours after your initial edit, contrary to WP:1RR. I suggest you self revert and gain a consensus at the TP before reinstating your collage. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:50, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My work was also cancelled. If anyone is interested in this map, they can always go down to the bottom of this same article where they will see it. Algirr (talk) 03:35, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to discussions about infoboxes, and edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

M.Bitton (talk) 01:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did not break any rules or engage in vandalism. I was trying to help expand the article. I added more and different photos of the conflict to help people better understand the conflict from the beginning. Algirr (talk) 01:43, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am expanding the article - you are canceling this and telling me something else about what I should respect? You did not even leave information about it being part of the Arab Cold War (of which it is a part, according to the corresponding article in that same Wikipedia). Algirr (talk) 01:48, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You did break a rule (by adding unsourced content to it) and, contrary to what you're claiming, I'm not telling you something else. I strongly suggest you familiarize yourself with WP:INFOBOXES. M.Bitton (talk) 01:50, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then I propose to remove the function of adding several photos from Wikipedia if it cannot be used. And I propose to remove the ability to add information about what larger conflict one specific conflict one is part of. Otherwise new users get confused - the function exists but it cannot be used. Algirr (talk) 01:57, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Western Sahara conflict. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. M.Bitton (talk) 01:53, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

prohibit editing on a free editing site - sounds brilliant)) Algirr (talk) 01:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that you're edit warring over infoboxes across multiple articles should tell you something. M.Bitton (talk) 02:03, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

what you mean? I try to do article about Sahara conflict and 15-year long war bigger, I did. You cancelled it all.Yes , I am edit conflicts and infoboxes, because it is why wikipedia mean - Ability to redact and expand article. Algirr (talk) 02:07, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Central Revolutionary Investigation Department has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. This is your final warning. Further violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy will result in you being blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:51, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think that this is protected by copyright? What kind of nonsense is this? Algirr (talk) 15:30, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The document is marked as "© Copyright Amnesty International Publications 1981"; "All rights reserved". — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:59, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But it is very old document, created decades ago Algirr (talk) 00:48, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright has not expired. It will not expire until 2051 at the earliest. See this chart. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:10, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Algirr, a good portion of this edit added very closely paraphrased text from this source. It was published in 2009 and has no indication it is in the public domain or otherwise freely licensed, so you should assume it is copyrighted. Copyright is taken seriously on Wikipedia; please insert text in your own words and use short quotes when necessary. ObserveOwl (talk) 06:57, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It also doesn't say anywhere that it's licensed, and if it's not written anywhere, it shouldn't be considered as such. This is no longer my mistake or problem. Algirr (talk) 15:27, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Creative works are automatically copyrighted even if it has no copyright notice due to the Berne Convention. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources: "If a work does not have a copyright notice, assume it to be under copyright-protection." ObserveOwl (talk) 15:33, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I will know it for future. Algirr (talk) 22:17, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yemeni civil war (1994), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Al-Bayda. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:54, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Militarism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Syrian coup d'état.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I know, just i need a link which will send reader to the place where is all Syrian coups will be Algirr (talk) 15:25, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Military Committee. Thanks! Bobby Cohn (talk) 20:52, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Central Revolutionary Investigation Department. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:46, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1984 Syrian coup attempt, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 22% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

CitrusHemlock 12:05, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ogaden War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page M47.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I will fix it later, thanks Algirr (talk) 19:56, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Military Command Council. Thanks! 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 23:32, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks) but most of the sources I have using in this article is links on sites. It don't have pages, it all on the same "page". And those words that I did not quote, for the most times, refer to the links already attached later. Algirr (talk) 23:47, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Sultan Yacoub, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page M48.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

okay, thanks. Algirr (talk) 19:54, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Military Command Council, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 11:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I saw that you recently created an article about the Military Command Council, the North Yemen junta of the 1970s. To further enrich this topic, I have a suggestion: It would be a good idea to write an article about the June 13 Corrective Movement, the 1974 military coup that put this junta in power. I hope you liked the idea, keep up your good work. Vrostky (talk) 00:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is good idea which will expand the number of articles about Yemen and provide new details about the history of this country)) I can't say how soon I'll make this article, but I like the idea and this moment will definitely come)) Algirr (talk) 01:47, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vrostky, i am done with that) it is here Algirr (talk) 01:15, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! I will proudly translate this article to other versions of Wikipedia in the future. Btw, I suggest you make some improvements to the article about North Yemen's Military Command Council. For example, if possible, you could add a section about council's formation, such as its members. I checked Arabic sources and it seems that this military junta was also called the "Leadership Council", but I'm not sure about this information. I found a source that suggests the council was abolished on 22 April 1978 1. Vrostky (talk) 01:22, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i will enjoy to see my topic on other languages, thanks) Yes, if we have more references, I will do improvements with MCC article, and thanks for your link) Algirr (talk) 01:25, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, I will add information about member of an MCC, if I will found sources, which I don't sure founded yet Algirr (talk) 03:25, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Assadism, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:28, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	nice work on the article FuzzyMagma (talk) 08:52, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

wow, thanks! Algirr (talk) 18:29, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that by making this revert, you broke the 1RR restriction in place, which requires you to wait 24 hours before making another revert. Also, your collage is not compliant, as the policy requires separate images and does not allow united ones. Quetstar (talk) 05:35, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The policy allows for merged images, as evidenced by their use in other articles. Algirr (talk) 18:33, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Arab Cold War. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Skitash (talk) 03:36, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You in Edit war too. "Other editors" who is this? almost all (except 1) times the rollback was done by you. Algirr (talk) 05:40, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Algirr reported by User:M.Bitton (Result: ). Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 22:54, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I am answered there Algirr (talk) 23:11, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article) and Draft) for copyright violations.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 15:51, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Salah Jadid was picked up today by Copypatrol; while your edits to the article weren't a direct copy and paste, there was considerable overlap (Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing) with the cited source; log into Copypatrol and click "iThenticate" to see it. I looked at your other edits to the article and found close phrasing to other cited sources, including Asad of Syria: The Struggle for the Middle East and the journal article "The Neo-Ba'th Party of Syria". Unfortunately, I find myself needing to block you given your previous block and history of warnings. If you want to be unblocked, you need to commit to not from copying from sources in your future editing and demonstrate a better understanding of copyright. User:Moneytrees/Copyright blocks contains some advice on appealing this block. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 15:58, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it for an indefinite period? Firstly, this is, secondly, everything taken from the books is taken from the open library "jstor" Algirr (talk) 15:55, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

and I did not violate any copyrights, all information was taken from open sources that were indicated. Algirr (talk) 15:57, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's a difference between a source being accessible online and it being free to copy from. If a source is free to copy from, it'll usually clearly indicate that it's in the public domain or has a Creative Commons license; as far as I can tell, the sources you cited are under copyright, unfortunately. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 16:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t copy it, I translated it into my native language and then wrote what I needed, alas, by hand.

Be sure to remove any other links to authors like Patrick Seal because they are still there. Algirr (talk) 16:07, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is, after deleting 90 percent of the article, I can’t even see what it all looked like or save it at least for myself? Algirr (talk) 16:09, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, of course it can overlap, I (and all another people) have to get the information from somewhere. With such formulations i can invent the information yourself, there will be fewer problems. Nobody blocked me before. Did I understand correctly: I need to commit not to edit the article or not to leave links to the information when editing? Algirr (talk) 16:02, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem isn't that you're editing an article or that you're linking to your sources, you haven't done anything wrong on that end. The issue is that the text you are adding to the source is copied from sources; outside of wikipedia, something like this is more commonly called Plagiarism. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 18:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't copy from there, I just rewrote it, including using a translator - that's the point of using information in that way. Plagiarism would be if I awarded the content entirely to myself, but I didn't do that. Algirr (talk) 18:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you rewrite the text, there's still enough overlap for it to be problematic. I'll provide some side by sides of what you wrote vs the source to illustrate what I'm saying:

Source: The regime became hated and estranged from much of the Syrian people. The main opponents to the regime were the traders and members of the middle class, who were economically affected, and also the religious such as the Ulama and Sunni Muslims, who objected to the regime's policies against religion

Your addition: His regime became hated and alienated by most of the Syrian people. The regime's main opponents were merchants and members of the middle class, who suffered economically, and religious figures such as the ulama and Sunni Muslims, who objected to the regime's policies against religion

Source: A number of ex-army officers now also held key positions; most of them belonged to a clandestine group called 'Military Convention' which had used 'Trojan horse' tactics within the Ba'ath party's civilian body.

Your addition: A number of ex-army officers now also held key positions; most of them belonged to a clandestine group called "Military Convention" which had used "Trojan horse" tactics within the Ba'ath party's civilian body

Source: Initially, the Soviet Union was cold and hesitant towards the new regime but the Syrians, fearing that a lack of open support from one or other of the super powers would make them vulnerable, decided to acquire Soviet approval through delegations and pro-Soviet declarations, and, indeed, the Soviet leadership eventu ally agreed to take Syria on as an ally.

Your addition: Initially, the Soviet Union was cold and hesitant toward the new regime, but Jadid, fearing that the lack of overt support from one superpower or another would leave Syria vulnerable, decided to seek Soviet approval through delegations and pro-Soviet statements. And indeed, the Soviet leadership eventually agreed to take Syria as an ally

Usually only a few words from the source are changed. Even if an edit isn't identical to the source, it can still be plagiarism. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 18:40, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that means it is translated basically the same way as it is written in the text. Algirr (talk) 18:42, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure that even if the text had been significantly changed but its essence remained the same, the claim would not have gone away. Algirr (talk) 18:43, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, translations of a copyrighted work are still under copyright. I only noticed the edit because of its overlap with the source; it can be worded differently but still convey the same meaning and keep its essence. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 18:47, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that means this information simply can't be used?

The last times I tried to formulate the text in a different way, I still got a warning Algirr (talk) 19:02, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

can you at least return 50,000 of the deleted text so that I can rephrase it later? Algirr (talk) 20:01, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can email it to you, if you're ok with that. Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing has some tips on how to avoid overlap in your work and your sources. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 20:11, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, you can, but please, divide the text same way it was before your deleting ("Relations", "Domestic/external Policy", etc) Algirr (talk) 20:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

and also write me here please when you done sending text to me Algirr (talk) 20:26, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I've done so now. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 20:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have message on Wiki that you wrote to my email. but I can't click on it. And when I go to the Google gmail site, I am don't have your message too. Algirr (talk) 21:08, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably in your spam/junk folder. If you have a Wikipedia notification about an e-mail, that means the e-mail was sent. You can't view the e-mail on Wikipedia. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, its not there Algirr (talk) 21:34, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no. I am found it, thanks. Algirr (talk) 21:34, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Algirr, if "I am found it" is your current level of English, please allow me to suggest that editing a different Wikipedia would be a good idea and getting unblocked on the English Wikipedia is unlikely without making good edits in a language you're more familiar with for a while. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:55, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mostly use a translator. Thanks of course, but this tempting offer doesn't interest me - the English Wikipedia is the most developed in terms of existing articles and the like.

I didn't understand how you connected my blocking with my level of English. Algirr (talk) 22:24, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, if you use a translator, you should not edit the English Wikipedia. I mean, a lot of your edits have tons of grammatical errors that even a child would detect. Quetstar (talk) 23:18, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes? It's strange. Well, if you make such a conclusion, then I assume you saw my edits and read them, but instead of correcting grammatical errors "that even a child would detect" you preferred to delete a single collage or map in the infobox. Algirr (talk) 03:23, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Algirr, I saw your email-- you can still create and edit pages in your user space (like at User:Algirr/draft/Salah Jadid, for example); pasting what you sent me into there might make reviewing and editing it easier for both of us, if that's alright with you. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 02:36, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could this have been said earlier?) Algirr (talk) 03:04, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't sure if that was what you wanted. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 03:11, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you talking about. Of course wikipedia redactor for text copied from Wikipedia will be better for me. Algirr (talk) 03:13, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

well, I pasted it there and fixed all troubles Algirr (talk) 04:12, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I need to send its text to you? Algirr (talk) 15:26, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reviewing it now. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 16:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In my draft which you sent to me? Algirr (talk) 16:27, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay, I've finished spot checking User:Algirr/draft/Salah Jadid-- I'm impressed, I found no serious issues, although you might want to cut down on some of the longer quotations. I'm willing to unblock you now-- what was the editing process you used when rewriting? Make sure to use it in your edits to articles moving forward. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 17:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  what you mean "what was the editing process"? Algirr (talk) 17:55, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Okay, I will try, but I don't really understand what are you asking about) Algirr (talk) 18:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  As in, while writing the article this time around, what did you do differently? You said something earlier that made it sound like you were translating the text through a few languages before pasting it in; are you still doing that? Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 18:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, I tried to radically change and simplify the wording. Somewhere I had to cut the text a lot Algirr (talk) 19:57, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, now I don't need to translate. I already know what is that says about Algirr (talk) 19:59, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  So, will you return it to the article at least? Algirr (talk) 21:15, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, I've unblocked you now-- feel free to add your new text back to Salah Jadid. If you have any questions around copyright and such in the future, please let me know. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 03:40, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Okay, thank you)) Algirr (talk) 03:40, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hafez al-Assad. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Skitash (talk) 22:18, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding me? You provoked this and you're still saying I'm involved? Algirr (talk) 22:21, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on South Yemen. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Skitash (talk) 21:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is the point of your spam? if you didn't notice we had a discussion Algirr (talk) 22:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved content from South Yemen into Corrective Move. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content (here or elsewhere), Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:47, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I left links to the material there, the same as they were in the original article Algirr (talk) 15:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If so, it would be helpful if you read the books on https://www.alinaser.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%A4%D9%84%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%AA so we can expand those articles quicker 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 17:10, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To my great regret and despite my attempts to learn it, I unfortunately cannot speak, write or read Arabic, sorry(( My grandfather from Syria but I am itself born and lived in Russia Algirr (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. Skitash (talk) 22:19, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  EvergreenFir (talk) 23:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, we done here. Moderation simply doesn't care about counterarguments and the fact that THERE WAS A DISCUSSION, YOU LISTEN, THERE WAS. HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO REPEAT THAT THERE WAS A DISCUSSION, THE LAST WORD WAS MINE. And in my opinion, this blocking is simply unjustified, bastard behavior on the part of the moderators, ignoring ANY counterarguments and a banal abuse of their power. Algirr (talk) 23:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Algirr you dont have to shout or attack anyone. It's only a 24 hour block. 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 04:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a problem with it being a 24 hour block. I have a problem with it being completely unjustified and showing the disgusting attitude of the admins, who didn't even try to check the topic's discussion page or respond to my counterarguments out of decency, just ignoring them and blocking me. Algirr (talk) 15:49, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You "discussed" it for less than a day. And why is the last word yours?

Regardless, you were edit warring. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And why is the last word yours?
Ill answer that: I went to sleep, that's why his comment was last 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 04:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I had no way of knowing whether you went to bed or not) that's why I don't think this is an excuse for the administrators' actions and it can't be held against me Algirr (talk) 15:33, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

and by the way, you even now not answered to me there Algirr (talk) 15:46, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Algirr You were blocked for breaking the Wikipedia:3 revert rule and from the warnings that I'm seeing above, you clearly knew, or at least should've known, about its existence. Also, I have nothing more to add to that discussion, I am still not convinced by your argument. You should start an RfC regarding the usage of that image in the place of the army image. Or you could wait till we finish writing the South Yemen article, and after that, we will discuss every image used in that article 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 15:59, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's strange. If I make changes and they are cancelled - it's only me who is to blame and only I broke the rule (like in the article about South Yemen). If someone else makes changes and I cancel them - it's still only me who is to blame and only I broke another rule (like in the article about the fall of the Assad regime). It's a surprising pattern, but in all these cases my changes were resisted by administrators who, for some reason, were not warned that they had broken something and EVEN MOREOVER, were not blocked. I have no idea what the RFU is, I don't understand idiotic and complex terminology and thousands of abbreviations, but as far as I understand, making changes to popular articles is a fatal mistake, because at any moment a moderator will come running and cancel everything to hell. Okay, let's do without discussion, so be it, since this is punishable here by almost the death penalty. Algirr (talk) 16:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, I repeat once again, the discussion took place and ended with my words, I had no way of knowing whether you went to sleep or were convinced by my arguments, just as the administrators could not know this, but for some reason they are always right. Algirr (talk) 16:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

4 hours and 43 minutes is not a sufficient length of discussion. 16 minutes without a reply is insufficient to assume consensus by WP:SILENCE. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:14, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah? Well, wow, do we need to stretch the discussion out over a couple of years for it to be "sufficient"? Well, overall, I'm not particularly surprised that there are such nuances. Algirr (talk) 18:54, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait... First I was accused of the fact that there was no discussion, and this became the reason for the unjustified ban. Now, after the ban, you admit that there WAS a discussion, but for some reason it is somehow incorrect and still justifies my blocking.

The discussion ended with my words, in any case, as you have already been answered, which means I had the right to put my damn image. But some administrators have a tendency to get into all the disputes and heat them up by also canceling edits, without even properly checking whether there was a discussion. Algirr (talk) 15:30, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

dude this isnt about us targeting you you just did a bunch of edit wars

its literally a day long its not like you've been blocked on all projects forever. ⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 17:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know you at all and I didn’t say anything specifically about you. I have already answered who did what Algirr (talk) 17:42, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you stop being rude please? anyone is allowed to comment in whatever discussion they want 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 17:44, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please show me where I was rude again? Algirr (talk) 18:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Assadism. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Skitash (talk) 17:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why the administrators are now not doing their favorite deletion of photos in articles, but deleting my responses on my own discussion page? Damn, how suddenly my comments disappeared) Algirr (talk) 23:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. Skitash (talk) 21:25, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why the administrators are now not doing their favorite deletion of photos in articles, but deleting my responses on my own discussion page? Damn, how suddenly my comments disappeared) Algirr (talk) 23:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  EvergreenFir (talk) 21:32, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why the administrators are now not doing their favorite deletion of photos in articles, but deleting my responses on my own discussion page? Damn, how suddenly my comments disappeared) Algirr (talk) 23:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, nothing surprising. Again, as always, the Non-Administrator is to blame and only he bears the punishment. Algirr (talk) 23:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Admins are elected and trusted by the community to resolve situations like this. Deal with it. Quetstar (talk) 00:10, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have already noticed that no one tried to question their brilliance and beauty. Including you - after all, it is beneficial for you to have a person among the administrators who will support your deletion of photos and content Algirr (talk) 01:35, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Algirr, I don't think your comments here rose to the level that should have been reverted by Nahida. At the same time, it's obvious that the comments border on personal attacks and are generally unhelpful. I suggest that the only thing you do while you're blocked is make an unblock request, not venting or being otherwise disruptive. If you don't heed this warning, you risk having your Talk page access revoked.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:15, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Fair. You should still generally comment on edits instead of other editors though, as Bbb23 suggested. Nahida 🌷 00:27, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  By an amazing coincidence, while I was commenting on edits and pure reality, but this still didn’t stop you from deleting the comments) Algirr (talk) 01:41, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Well yes, but for some reason Nahida herself thinks differently. "border on personal attacks" i.e. are the facts and reality now personal attacks? Got it, I'll take that into account in the future. If they are unhelpful, then the question arises - why remove them?)) This is such a useful activity for society. Sending a unblock request to the same people who blocked me, you are just a genius strategist) Well, yes, it is quite justified and fair - in all edit wars (where the opponent is an administrator, and the same one at that) to shift all the blame onto the non-administrator and then threaten to lose access to something else Algirr (talk) 01:40, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  TPA revoked.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:44, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Bbb23 Unsurprisingly EvergreenFir (talk) 05:19, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]