User talk:Astroye

Welcome!
Hello, Astroye, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:


 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:23, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Please, you have got to stop removing sourced info. Please also do not add bare links as sources and try to find English-language sources if you can. If you need help, please let me know. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:16, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You have to stop removing sourced info yourself ! All I did was removing irrelevant sources and replacing them by relevant ones ! You can check if you want to. Moreover pre-existing non english sources were there and nobody said nothing and most of my sources are English ones so please stop vandalism by erasing all my contributions because you are the one who is breaking that page ! Astroye (talk) 10:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It is okay to have old references for old claims: don't remove them. And yes, it is acceptable to have non-English sources, just preferable to have English. No, your edits broke several templates. I understand if you are new to Wikipedia and it's okay to make mistakes but you have to stop removing information that you don't like. I can't go thru all of your edits to ensure that you are doing them in a way that is correct, so you'll have to be more careful or ask for help if you need it. If you insist on removing a dozen sources and inserting 20 bare links, and also breaking a table while you're doing it, I will revert just to keep my sanity. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:37, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No it's not ok when the links to those references aren't working anymore or simply dead. As I said most of the sources I added are in English and impartial. Yes I agree I may have broken several templates and I am sorry for that, indeed I am new to Wikipedia my bad.
 * It's not that I don't like those informations they are not sourced or sourced with not working links or with irrelevant sources. All the sources I removed were ones in a category I just listed above. I understand that you can't check everything that is inserted and that you try to keep the page in shape first so I will keep that in mind next time but it's really not easy to do so on a phone. I thank you for your politeness and patience to explain it to me. Have a nice day. Astroye (talk) 00:09, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Then you can mark the link as dead and someone can search for a live version on a site like Internet Archive. Of course, I'm happy to help and I'm glad you're interested in making the encyclopedia better. Welcome. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

No it's not vandalism when it's not relevant. Can I contribute ? And you revoked my sourced info so you are the one doing vandalism. http://www.statehouse.gov.sl/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=330:special-envoy-brings-president-koroma-good-message&catid=34:news-articles | publisher=The Republic of Sierra Leone - State House What has this source in connection with the matter ? What does it do here ? IT IS ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT !! AND THAT IS ONLY ONE EXAMPLE AMONGST OTHER ! Astroye (talk) 22:54, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Warning
Removing valid, sourced information is vandalism (blanking, illegitimate--see also WP:PRESERVE). You've been told several times to stop doing this and yet, you persist. If you insist on removing encyclopedic content, you will be blocked. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:36, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note that you also did the same here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foreign_relations_of_Morocco&action=historysubmit&type=revision&diff=881512314&oldid=880882656 and broke a reference. We've talked about this several times. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:43, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

No it's not vandalism when it's not relevant. Can I contribute ? And you revoked my sourced info so you are the one doing vandalism.

http://www.statehouse.gov.sl/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=330:special-envoy-brings-president-koroma-good-message&catid=34:news-articles What has or in which way is this source in connection with the matter ? Maybe you have an answer ? What does it do here ? IT IS ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT ! Astroye (talk) 23:01, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Stop removing sourced info, like you did here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_recognition_of_the_Sahrawi_Arab_Democratic_Republic&diff=0&oldid=882985367 If you want to add things, do that. Don't remove sourced info anymore. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:16, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

I only remove what is irrelevant. You can check the three sources I have removed plus one dead link that I have marked and that nobody corrected if you want confirmation. Astroye (talk) 02:27, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The above link was 100% relevant: see how I have an archived version now. You also changed Chad to a "no" when it has several sources indicating "yes". ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:39, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
 * This is the last warning I will give you. The archived link from the Republic of Sierra Leone is sourced info that supports the claim. The Mali source you provided does not support the claim you make. I am reverting you again for vandalism but I will report you to an admin if you do it again. Please discuss individual sources on the article's talk page. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:07, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Keep your warning for yourself. The link from Sierra Leone is irrelevant and empty there is nothing on it about the Sahara. As opposed to the Mali source I provided which is used on the french page for instance to support the claim I make. Whether the Mali source doesn't support it is your personal assumption which we don't care for. So I will revert you again for vandalism. Astroye (talk) 07:51, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Please see the source for Sierra Leone which clearly states that they have bilateral relations and share embassies. Removing this valid, sourced information is vandalism as I pointed out above. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:16, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

February 2019
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:24, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

June 2019
Your recent editing history at Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 19:56, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:. ··· 日本穣 ·  投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 19:58, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Removing sources
Seems like you're at it again. Why are you removing sources? ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:22, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

WP:AN thread
See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=933930500#User:Astroye_removing_sourced_information_repeatedly ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:10, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Stop
You're doing it again. Sources like http://www.lesothoembassy.ie/lesotho-missions.html explicitly say Lesotho has relations with the SADR, and yet you wrote that they don't. Stop your vandalism or you'll be blocked again. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:04, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Block yourself first then. Lesotho’s foreign affairs minister explicitely confirmed the comittment of his country to withdraw sadr recognition, and that any past and future declarations contradicting this position will be null and void. Astroye (talk) 17:02, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

You are literally just writing the opposite of what sources say
See http://www.lesothoembassy.ie/lesotho-missions.html: "Saharawi Republic". Stop it. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:12, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I don’t care about your none realiable and outdated source. Stop it yourself. Astroye (talk) 03:22, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You cannot use a source that says, "[x] is true" to prove that "[x] is not true". Please understand WP:V and use sources appropriately, or else you will be blocked yet again. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:26, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Block yourself first then I don’t care for your garbage nonesense. Astroye (talk) 03:07, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * If you don't back up your edits with reliable sources that accurately confirm these, you will be blocked from editing, probably indefinitely. You're allowed to be a single-purpose account, but you must adhere to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. There will be no further warning. El_C 19:39, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Warn, adhere to Wikipedia’s policies guidelines and indefinitely block yourself dumbass. I always back up my edits as opposed to you. I’m the only one that made this page evolve back when you weren’t existing at all and I’m fed up of you and your incompetence (I try to stay polite as much as I can not to insult you). Astroye (talk) 19:33, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , Did you see this? ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure to whom that unindented comment was directed to, but it does demonstrate aptly that Astroye is not taking these warnings seriously. El_C 20:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

It was directed to you both. It only demonstrates that you are dumbasses. Astroye (talk) 16:59, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

May 2020
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing and battleground conduct persisting. 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:. . El_C 20:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Injustice !
The admin who blocked me pretends «disruptive» with no more justifications nor proof when I only improved this page(among others) since the first day I subscribed I’m constructively contributing (you can check this fact) and learning. Even worse, (and I genuinely didn’t knew he could) he blocked me indefinitely when he could have set a deadline instead just to avenge himself. Indeed he also blocked the page from edition do I wasn’t even a «threat» then just blocked me which is a flagrant violation of Wikipedia’s policy guidelines. Astroye (talk) 18:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The "dumbasses" personal attack above is sufficient to justify this block. To be unblocked, you will need to indicate that you understand personal attacks are never acceptable and describe how you resolve any editing dispute you have. If you make another request and spend it just attacking the blocking admin, it isn't likely to succeed.  The choice is yours. 331dot (talk) 18:46, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

I understand personal attacks are never acceptable and I won’t do it again. Except for this editing dispute, my previous arguments and the point I made are all valid to support my claim. The blocking admin violated Wikipedia’s policies and guidelines rules when he reverted my edits whereas I contributed the most, then blocked the page from edition whitout any justifications. Admins must be neutral. Astroye (talk) 19:33, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You are free to make another unblock request; someone else will review it. 331dot (talk) 20:39, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Injustice !!
 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

UTRS 30509
UTRS #30509 was submitted on 2020-05-10 16:17:09. This review is now closed. -- Deep fried okra  User talk:Deepfriedokra 20:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)