User talk:Bahironga

March 2023

Hello, I'm Tommi1986. I noticed that you recently removed content from History of Algeria without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Tommi1986 ^{let's talk!} 12:51, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at History of Algeria, you may be blocked from editing. M.Bitton (talk) 15:37, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2020 Dijon riots

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2020 Dijon riots. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. You changed (twice) one of the parties involved in the conflict, without any reliable source Terrum3 (talk) 13:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Almohad Caliphate. M.Bitton (talk) 22:05, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for POV editing an lack of collaboration.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:26, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear ponyo.

I haven't done anything wrong. I'll explain the situation so you can understand my point of view. a user named M.Bitta keeps changing posts without really good reason. Partly for anti-Semitic reasons. one of these changes concerns Moroccan culture. I have given the user several reputable sources that prove that Morocco has several rich people. He deliberately ignores them. Accordingly, he argues that there is insufficient evidence. That's why I removed the empires that he himself introduced in Algeria because, according to his argument, there is no sufficient reason. It's a pity that Wikipedia contains so much wrong information and users have deliberately claimed false facts.

Dear ponyo. I haven't done anything wrong. I'll explain the situation so you can understand my point of view. a user named M.Bitta keeps changing posts without really good reason. Partly for anti-Semitic reasons. one of these changes concerns Moroccan culture. I have given the user several reputable sources that prove that Morocco has several rich people. He deliberately ignores them. Accordingly, he argues that there is insufficient evidence. That's why I removed the empires that he himself introduced in Algeria because, according to his argument, there is no sufficient reason. It's a pity that Wikipedia contains so much wrong information and users have deliberately claimed false facts. For example the flag of the almohad. several reputable sources state that it is red and has a checkerboard pattern. The user M.bitta removed it without giving a reason. When I removed the Empires in Algeria, since there is probably no sufficient evidence according to M.bitta, he reintroduced them. the perfect example is Mauretania. In Morocco he says it wasn't a state, but in Algeria it was. So you can see that Wikipedia simply suffers from seriousness due to such users. He's also anti-Semitic and played down the persecution of Jews in his edits, but well M.bitta obviously has a free hand. Bahironga (talk) 23:33, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is nothing but personal attacks and aspersions wrapped up with a POV bow. You not only have very much done something wrong, you continue to do so in your denial. The directions for requesting an unblock are included in the block template; I won't be replying further.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]