User talk:Danju87

March 2023

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Berbers. 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:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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) 18:27, 15 March 2023 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Danju87 reported by User:M.Bitton (Result: ). Thank you. M.Bitton (talk) 18:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Berbers. 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 think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 18:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23 {{unblock|reason=The whole point of the undo change battle is about the origin of the word berber. in my sources the origin of the word Berber comes from Greek (barbaros) and it means foreign people.

since I am berber I live in a berber country as my IP adress suggests and I speak berber language I am confident this source is correct. the users that are party to this conflict are neither familiar with the history of my country/people nor are they aiming to contribute to the wikipedia community as one of the reverse change notes suggest if you read (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dhtwiki)'s personal change of the article about berbers he claims there are grammatical sources in the article but he refuses to correct them but has the audacity to undo the change, he has no intention to want to contribute by correcting what he refers to as errors but undoes the change anyways.

since I provided good sources to my claims I believe that this anti semitic attack on my people and country should be fixed.

they keep reversing this change to tarnish the reputation of my people, they use the arabic dictionary source to try to say arabs invented the term berber and that the greek source is incorrect and talks about how my people are barbaric according to their arabic source which according to them the arabs made the word berber, they even refused the meaning of the word Amazigh which is in amazigh language means "Free man" because their entire goal is to spread misinformation about my race and my history. once and once again I am morally obliged to fix this infringement upon myself and my ancestors.

I hope that my request to be unblocked will be accepted and I wish that this mistake in the wikipedia article is fixed. Danju87 (talk) 19:02, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Danju87 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The whole point of the undo change battle is about the origin of the word berber. in my sources the origin of the word Berber comes from Greek (barbaros) and it means foreign people. ::since I am berber I live in a berber country as my IP adress suggests and I speak berber language I am confident this source is correct. the users that are party to this conflict are neither familiar with the history of my country/people nor are they aiming to contribute to the wikipedia community as one of the reverse change notes suggest if you read (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dhtwiki)'s personal change of the article about berbers he claims there are grammatical sources in the article but he refuses to correct them but has the audacity to undo the change, he has no intention to want to contribute by correcting what he refers to as errors but undoes the change anyways. ::since I provided good sources to my claims I believe that this anti semitic attack on my people and country should be fixed. ::they keep reversing this change to tarnish the reputation of my people, they use the arabic dictionary source to try to say arabs invented the term berber and that the greek source is incorrect and talks about how my people are barbaric according to their arabic source which according to them the arabs made the word berber, they even refused the meaning of the word Amazigh which is in amazigh language means "Free man" because their entire goal is to spread misinformation about my race and my history. once and once again I am morally obliged to fix this infringement upon myself and my ancestors. ::I hope that my request to be unblocked will be accepted and I wish that this mistake in the wikipedia article is fixed

Decline reason:

Of course you think you are correct. Both sides think they are correct when engaging in an edit war. Nothing here convinces me you'd take a different approach if unblocked. In fact, it indicates you are here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and should have your block extended indefinitely, but I'm hoping you slow down, read the various policies, and better understand how to resolve conflicts here on Wikipedia. Yamla (talk) 19:05, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.