User talk:Sarah Ext

March 2020
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Said Belcadi has been reverted. Your edit here to Said Belcadi was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAbCb5R789a5jN_16E4UdsA) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. music or video) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 08:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020
Hello, I'm Mr Xaero. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Said Belcadi, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mr Xaero  ☎️ 19:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Said Belcadi, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mr Xaero  ☎️ 19:44, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Said Belcadi Article
On the article Said Belcadi, you have made quite a few edits that do not have any proper references or cited articles. You do have a single reference to a personal website that appears to be for the subject of the article. However, this single reference does not validate all of the information that you have added. Please look at the following help documents prior to adding such unreferenced information to the article. See WP:BLP, WP:VERIFY, WP:SOURCE. — Mr Xaero   ☎️ 20:02, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours from the article Said Belcadi for the repeated overwriting of the article and addition of unsourced content. 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:. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:52, 6 March 2020 (UTC) =

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Mr Xaero  ☎️ 23:48, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Saïd Belcadi


A tag has been placed on Saïd Belcadi, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Thegooduser  Life Begins With a Smile :)  🍁 02:45, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring
Your recent editing history at Said Belcadi 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. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 09:43, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

_____

Hi! Please I need help. What is exactly wrong with my edit?
How can I make my edits better? The information on the page is not enough about the person. Sarah Ext (talk) 10:02, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Hey! I tried my best to edit a biography by adding up more information but it always happens that my modification is undone because of the quality of sources. I added up more sources but in vain.

Please help me with...

Sarah Ext (talk) 10:11, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia requires independent reliable sources. Wikipedia, YouTube and other user generated sites are not reliable. Please familiarize yourself with this policy and refrain from editing the article again or you risk being blocked, as indicated in the notice above. Additionally, it appears you've been blocked before, for this exact behavior. If you continue, you're going to wind up blocked indefinitely, so I suggest you cease editing the article altogether. Praxidicae (talk) 13:02, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Praxidicae (talk) 17:12, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for edit warring, as you did at Said Belcadi. 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:. Bbb23 (talk) 17:20, 9 March 2020 (UTC)