Monsieur Patillo

January 2017

Your recent editing history at Ottoman Algeria shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your being blocked from editing—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doug Weller talk 20:33, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello @Doug Weller:.

Sorry for editing, but Surena20 is a vandale known in french Wikipedia [1]. The version who he wants to impose is note based on references specialised on the topic. So i think you have to tell Surena20 that he have to go on the talk page to explain what is the arguments for his edit. Best regards, Kabyle20 (talk) 21:24, 4 January 2017 (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 Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Kleuske (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

April 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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.  NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:54, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Invitation

	You are invited to participate in WikiProject Berbers, a project dedicated to developing and improving articles about Berbers.
	You may sign up at the project members page.

-Aṭlas (talk) 04:46, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

August 2020

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 18:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Algero-sharifian conflicts

Hello, Kabyle20. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Algero-sharifian conflicts".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:53, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello :)

Hi, I like the map that you made for the Hammadids, as it is currently in use on the English page would you be able to modify it to represent the territories they held more accurately per supported sources as they held much more than what is shown on the map please? During the reign of al-Nasir the Hammadids held Tunis, Gabes, Gafsa, all of Tunisia until Sfax and Susa and also Tripoli. Also al-Nasir penetrated deep into the Sahara and held Ouargla could you please modify the map to compliment the sources more accurately and highlight them in green rather than the dotted lines as it was indeed all held during al-Nasirs reign, also the same for Tlemcen as the Hammadids never lost it until the Almoravid invasion. The Zenata Maghrawa state also ruled the entirety of the sous and Draa. If you need any more sources let me know. Thanks :)

• “At one point during their reign they also had possession of Sijilmasa as well as a number of oases south of Tunisia which were the termini of trans-Saharan routes.”

• “al-Nasir succeeded in expanding the Hammadids' domain over the Tunisian coast (including the cities Sfax and Susa) as far as Tripoli, then penetrated into the Sahara”

• “al-Nasir pushed eastward and established influence on the coast from Sfax over Susa to Tripoli and advanced southward far into the Sahara”

• “La ville de Tunis, devenue très florissante, en raison de la masse d'émigrés qu'elle avait recueillis, imita cet exemple. Elle envoya à En-Nacer une députation chargée de lui offrir sa soumission. Le prince hammadite accueillit avec empressement l'hommage des gens de Tunis, et leur donna,pour gouverneur, un sanhadjien nommé Abd-el-Hak-ben-Khoraçan, qui devait être le chef d'une nouvelle principauté.”

Kabz15 (talk) 02:53, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Muʿminid dynasty

Hello, Monsieur Patillo. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Muʿminid dynasty, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:03, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2024

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Algeria. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Skitash (talk) 14:47, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Algeria. Skitash (talk) 10:15, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Good morning, The source is very clear: it indicates Arab-Amazigh 99%, European less than 1% My modification is therefore faithful to the source. It is you who are basing yourself on the note to mislead and make people believe that 85% of Algerians have Arab origins, which the source does not indicate in any way, it just says that a minority identifies as such (this is therefore a feeling: "only a minority identify themselves as primarily Amazigh, about 15%"). Second, you remove an academic source that provides genetic data on the issue because it does not support your point of view (which is based on a falsification of the first source). Please do not appropriate the article. [https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/algeria/#people-and-society] Monsieur Patillo (talk) 10:31, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Please consider reading the source again. It says that only 15% identify as Berber, while the demographics section in the article goes into further detail and supports the 85% Arab and 15% Berber figures. Furthermore, genetics are different from ethnic identity and do not belong in the infobox. The source you added pertains to the genetics of the entire Maghreb and not specifically Algeria, so that constitutes source misinterpretation on your end. Skitash (talk) 12:12, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

1) Please be specific and say which quote you are referring to in the CIA Factbook? Why not use the precise terms of the source "Arab-Amazigh 99%, European less than 1%"? Why cobble together a new synthesis based on felt identity (and therefore not a tangible fact)? We don't even know those who are outside the 15%? Are these Arabs? Europeans? Arab-Amazigh? You assume they are Arabs without formal proof.

2) The source Dmoh Bacha cites "Bekada, 2013" which is a genetic study on Algeria and not on the Maghreb. The source cited is "Introducing the Algerian Mitochondrial DNA and Y-Chromosome Profiles into the North African Landscape". the genetic study of populations is part of ethnicity, at least it is one aspect of it. Unlike the note that you interpret in a new way, here these are intangible numbers. Monsieur Patillo (talk) 14:48, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

All this tells me is that you haven't bothered reviewing the talk page and all the established consensuses and edit requests there. You also failed to read the demographics section in the Algeria article which provides several sources confirming that Arabs constitute 85% of the population while Berbers form 15%. The genetic data you're so keen to add to the infobox is irrelevant and has nothing to do with ethnic identity. Skitash (talk) 17:09, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

I have already taken knowledge of the different sources. But the infobox highlighted a single source (CIA Factbook). Moreover, now that you highlight the demographic section, it calls for several remarks. Your approach is contrary to WP:NPOV: *

I - Section demography :

1) Encyclopedia Britanica notes that "'''More than three-fourths of the country is ethnically Arab, though most Algerians are descendants of ancient Amazigh groups who mixed with various invading peoples from the Arab Middle East, southern Europe, and sub-Saharan Africa. Arab invasions in the 8th and 11th centuries brought only limited numbers of new people to the region but resulted in the extensive Arabization and Islamization of the indigenous Amazigh population'''". The mentions in bold on the origin of the population which is Amazigh are deliberately not included in the article.

2) you only keep the mentions which arrange Arabization. Some turns of phrase are misleading (example: "Arabs and indigenous Berbers") while Britanica explains that what is perceived as Arab are in fact Arabized Berbers (and therefore not two different categories)

3)Then you claim that genetics has nothing to do with ethnicity.

a- This argument is purely opportunistic on your part, reference n°217: A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in North Africa, is precisely an article which deals with genetics and which is used to justify the 85%/15%. .. (by the way this is a misappropriation of the source)

b - You add a personal opinion that genetics has no place in the study of the ethnicity of a population. Except the article by Bekada (2013) demonstrates the opposite: the term ethnicity is used from the first line, terms like "

markers E-V65, E-M81 and J1-M267 confirm the geographic and ethnic identity of Algeria... .

". Genetics provides a point of view on ethnology (which is certainly not absolute but which is a fact). Dmoh Bacha talks to him about ethnic ancestry based on genetic studies. So the sources do use genetics to have elements to say about ethnicity and the study of the population.

II - Infobox

1) Please explain why the mention put forward by the CIA factbook ("

Arab-Amazigh 99%, European less than 1%") is ignored?

2) Why write an unpublished work of 15% Berber feeling (without specifying that it is about resentment) and claim that the other 85% are necessarily "Arabs"? On what basis? Are there also Europeans? It is in reality an unprecedented task to consider that there are necessarily 85% Arabs. Otherwise please provide the opposite mention? I already asked you for the quote, you ignored my request because it is not listed anywhere.

Temporary proposal = At ​​a minimum we must start by adding mentions of the massive Arabization of the indigenous Berbers and the fact that the majority of the indigenous people are of Berber origin in the demographic section (Britanica: "Arab invasions in the 8th and 11th centuries brought only limited numbers of new people to the region but resulted in the extensive Arabization and Islamization of the indigenous Amazigh population"; CIA Factbook "although almost all Algerians are Amazigh in origin and not Arab,").

Monsieur Patillo (talk) 19:27, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Algeria 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; read about 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—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—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Skitash (talk) 17:00, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

skitash, as a bystander to all of this, this current behavior is unbecoming and frankly a little xenophobic 71.237.181.220 (talk) 08:00, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry but, I didn't understand who/what is xenophobic? Monsieur Patillo (talk) 09:04, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

i was looking at the talk page and edit history on Algeria and it appears that many people, some of whom are actually from Algeria, are being strong armed by editors who put strictly conforming to every template policy over actually putting together a good encyclopedia page. in this context i was calling the editing behavior of the other users (not you) xenophobic, which in this context means they're being hostile to another culture or ethnic group, intentionally or otherwise 71.237.181.220 (talk) 10:18, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

The best is to express your opinion directly in the Algeria discussion page to say which changes you agree with (or not). Monsieur Patillo (talk) 22:28, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Requesting contact for important talk

Hello, I have noticed your recent contributions to Wikipedia and I would be interested in having a private conversation with you, if you see this message please email me, you can find the option to email me on my profile. Potymkin (talk) 22:09, 17 August 2024 (UTC)