User talk:Loaka1

Welcome!
Hello. There's a user who keeps removing several reliable sources that I added to the article Moors claiming that the wording is "finalized". I explained that the statement was not cited before but they keep removing the sources and the statement. Loaka1 (talk) 15:55, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Go to Talk:Moors and discuss your concerns there. If you look at Talk:Moors you can see that there was a consensus formed as to what the lead should read. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 16:44, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I echo what CambridgeBayWeather said. Drmies (talk) 17:20, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello ! WP:CONSENSUSCANCHANGE policy states: "Editors may propose a change to current consensus, especially to raise previously unconsidered arguments or circumstances." I have provided the reasons for the change in Talk:Moors. Please read them, thanks. Loaka1 (talk) 17:29, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I did, thanks! You're good with the abbreviations, I must say--probably better than me, though I'm familiar with WP:SOCKING. Sorry, but you know the rules. Drmies (talk) 17:34, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * , no need for the SPI, Swazzo and El Bass both belong to me. I'd like to say that I didn't misuse multiple accounts as WP:SOCK states and that my use was valid. Thank you. Loaka1 (talk) 17:52, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * sorry for bothering you, but regarding the article Moors, you said that you've read the reasons for the change. Was the reason for your revert is that you declined them? If so, may I at least be told the reasons why? Thank you, and sorry again. Loaka1 (talk) 10:11, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * No, the reason is that you didn't have talk page consensus--you just threw out a couple of inapplicable all-caps phrases. Also, you don't need to apologize for the bother. All you need to apologize for is the socking. It would be a positive thing if you declared your first account, in which case we can consider WP:OFFER. Drmies (talk) 15:52, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * First of all Drmies, I want to thank you for seeing good in me. I appreciate that a lot, I really do. My first account was Tarook97. Please do what you see works best. Loaka1 (talk) 17:17, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. We'll see; I left a note for the closing administrator at the SPI. Drmies (talk) 17:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Per WP:OFFER I recommend you wait at least six months without editing, then request an unblock at User talk:Tarook97. Sro23 (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Do you control any other accounts not yet admitted? Batternut (talk) 07:46, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * No, I do not. Loaka1 (talk) 07:50, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Please show good faith to other editors and don't tell them that their replies have no merit
See WP:AGF. Removing posts such as this or the 3RR warning is taken as evidence that you have read them. So, for instance, you don't need another 3RR warning, you can simply be blocked if you break 3RR or edit war. Doug Weller talk 17:21, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Understood. Thank you. Loaka1 (talk) 17:24, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Just a question..
in the article Nasrid dynasty, can you please take a look at the statement "The Nasrid dynasty was descended from the Arab Banu'l-Ahmar" in the Lineage section? Page 429 of the source states: It mentions "Banu'l-Ahmar" as another Arabic name of the dynasty, as the opening sentence of the article reads, and not a different tribe that the dynasty was descended from. I'm aware of the policy regarding edits on behalf of blocked users, but I think that edits correcting the misinformation would be "verifiable" and "productive" as the policy states. Thanks again. Loaka1 (talk) 09:01, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know this topic and will not a. get involved and b. be your proxy. Here's the advantage of being an editor with one single account for a long time: you build up a network of editors who may do things for the good of the project if you run into trouble. And if your edits, past and proposed, indeed improve our project, you should be able to make a good unblock request. But I am not yet sure that many believe that this Tarook account is your earliest. For all I know you're someone I have run into before, perhaps even blocked before. I'm sure you are aware of AGF--but you also know, since you're an adult, that trust is something that is built over time. BTW it is probably best to drop this account altogether and move back to Tarook, esp. if you want to work toward a successful unblock request. Good luck, Drmies (talk) 18:52, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I completely understand. And I will move back to Tarook. Thank you.
 * I will ping just to make sure they know of this. Loaka1 (talk) 22:36, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * My mistake. I guess if Loaka/Tarook/et.al. would use edit summaries to explain their removal of a reference and referenced information then this could have been avoided. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:23, 11 February 2018 (UTC)