I want to talk to ALborz Fallah whats his problem this guy does not know anything about the Iranian arabsArabAmazigh12 (talk) 20:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Iraqi Kurdistan has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Iraqi Kurdistan was changed by ArabAmazigh12 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.871751 on 2015-06-28T23:25:53+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 23:25, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Khuzestan Province may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ]'', ''[[Karkheh]]'', ''Jarahi'' and Maroun rivers. The northern section maintains a non-Persian ([[Bakhtiari people|Bakhtiari]], minority, while the southern section has a Arabic speaking majority

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:01, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ArabAmazigh12,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Iranian Ahwaz for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can , but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Athikhun (talk) 23:51, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Iranian Arabs page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ArabAmazigh12! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Samwalton9 (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:25, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Iranian Ahwaz is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iranian Ahwaz until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Iranian Ahwaz page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ArabAmazigh12. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Happy Squirrel (talk) 18:43, 10 July 2015 (UTC). (You can at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

Hello, I'm Gyrofrog. Your recent edit to the page Semitic languages appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Gyrofrog (talk) 19:44, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The current figures are based upon the cited references. If the other articles have updated figures, then feel free to cite those references, but please don't simply change figures while leaving existing citations in place. And Oromo is a Cushitic, not Semitic, language. Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 19:53, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually your wrong dude no offense oromo is Semitic according to the Ethopian government and I think the fact that's oromo people have Mixed Himyaric Orgins since I am An oromo linguist so I would know but its ok we all make errors cheers.ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 19:57, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Semitic languages. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Oromo is Cushitic. See, for example, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/oromo. If you have a source to the contrary then please cite it. Gyrofrog (talk) 19:57, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you're an Oromo linguist, then surely you can provide (and know the importance of providing) a reliable source that says Oromo is a Semitic language. If the Ethiopian government says it's Semitic, please indicate where they've said so. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:01, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

your still arguing like were children There are more than 300 million arab speakers you and I both know that so I think we should work on our edits together or we can just go at eachothers throats? on that just like the verniculars aren't that accurate im an native Arabic speaker so I fixed it alittleArabAmazigh12 (talk) 20:04, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There really isn't much to argue about. Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability if you already haven't. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:06, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question Phoenician is being under revival in Lebanon in some rural areas but there self speakers can I add that or do I need to find evidence I know that aljeezra mentioned it but there not reliable I guess?ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 20:29, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think an Al-Jazeera article (preferably in English) would be a suitable reference. (I couldn't find anything like that, myself – this article sounds similar, but it's behind a paywall and those are generally frowned upon as sources). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 21:10, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I have a very imporatant question Khorshani Arabic the page doesn't exist but It is spoken and it has a good number of speakers I found a website that speaks of it khorshani Arabic is An ancient Dialect and different than modern Arabic although I was wondering can we make the page or not?ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 04:01, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would depend on the website, and whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria as a reliable source. It would be better to identify multiple sources, rather than a single website. You could submit a draft via WP:AFC where other people can review it. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:07, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a ref for this edit, please provide. I've reverted your edit as unverified (and falsifying the existing ref). — kwami (talk) 23:17, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok? dude you make a big deal there population should have risen you have to add the fertility rate and the average family populations go up and so does the dialect based on how many children are being made you cant 1967 is the old cenus new data says there are 9,000 to 12,000 problem is id have to talk to the actual government census now wouldn't I?ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 20:59, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you would. You can't just guess. — kwami (talk) 01:25, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do not post fraudulent data as you did at Arabic. If you continue, you may be blocked for vandalism. — kwami (talk) 19:12, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

why is that other sources say you there is 340 million speakers yet you havent updated your sources im get references and links yet you guys keep balling me im not vandalizing anythingArabAmazigh12 (talk) 20:15, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the data in an article, so that we claim a source says something it does not, is fraud. And if you just make up the data, you are vandalizing the article. — kwami (talk) 19:40, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's the actual number of speakers 420million native Excluding the Kurds your the fraud stop changing it And falsying it do you work for the arab league do you know the number of native Arabic speakers no you don't Arabic speaking census of All dialect's which includes Arabic spoken in Afghanistan and central asia and in Russia Indonesia etc is taken by the Arab league so stop calling me a fraud because I will report you .ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 19:45, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Assyrian people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Adad-Nirari. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:29, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK thank you I fixed my edit appreciate it :)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Assyrian people page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:46, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thanks for your contributions! I just have a quick tip for you. When you make edits, please remember to sign your edits with 4 tildes (~~~~). This will automatically sign your edits with the username you have in your Preferences. Thanks!! ᵗʰᵉʰºᵗʷʰᵉᵉˡˢᵍᵘʸ₉₉ (ᵗᵃˡᵏ!) 21:11, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Hismaic. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Hismaic dialect. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Hismaic dialect – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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 removed 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 deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Theroadislong (talk) 08:44, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Um Excuss me sir Im the one who made Hismatic Dialect page Wikipedia didn't have one so please correct yourself I know I made 2 I messed up on the first one but thank you for your comment :) I was the one who requested a speedy deletionArabAmazigh12 (talk) 13:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

can I ask why was I banned???ArabAmazigh12 (talk) 01:26, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Future Perfect at Sunrise blocked you with a reference to Wikipedia:Competence is required. You may have come to his attention through your post at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#like to make a complinet about a user. Sometimes complaints like that backfire. —teb728 t c 01:49, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

yeah um it wont let me go on there hes made me like a sitting duck I had an article or 2 that I contributed to Wikipedia and now this happens pretty annoyingArabAmazigh12 (talk) 01:53, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

ArabAmazigh12 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was blocked for making a compliant about another User simply telling the user about the guidelines and how we shouldn't call one another incompetent over such a matter because he has reverted my edits on Assyrian people when I had shown Census etc. refs I have seen what ive down wrong in only a few hours may I please be unblock i will learn from my mistakes from this moment forward i know Wikipedia is not a child's play pen for little arguments and i admit i was at fault requisition for unblock we all make errors and i have made mine

Decline reason:

You're blocked because your competence to edit Wikipedia cooperatively with other editors is in question. You might start by presenting an unblock request written in English with punctuation, capitalization, and so on. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 04:16, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Although I was at the receiving end of ArabAmazigh12's complaint, I'm troubled by the idea that he might have been blocked because of the quality of his English, if that was indeed the reason. Plenty of people with poor English make valuable contributions to WP-en, and I've contributed to e.g. WP-ru where I don't speak the language. We want to be as universal as possible, and restricting access to people with a certain level of English would be detrimental to WP. I'd feel much better if the competence in question was not a question of his language ability, but a question of whether he can be relied on to present reliable information, to ensure that a ref actually supports his claims (e.g. not changing data while keeping the old ref, as if that were its source), and to not cherry-pick sources when he does use them. Especially when updating figures, none of that requires a high level of English, and there are plenty of people who are willing to correct punctuation and grammar. — kwami (talk) 07:08, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree with kwami here. It is a bad precedent to see English language skills as part of WP:CIR and horrendous that they could be a reason for a block. Let alone that one of those complaining at ANI about other's language skills began a sentence with a conjunction.

We are an international encyclopedia, covering international topics. That means we will rely on contributions on such topics from those who are not native English speakers. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:30, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both Andy and especially kwami for those comments I really appreciate it ...the admin stated he will not be unblock me unless I work on my English from what I understood from the admin that denyed it but English is not my first language its Arabic and Aramaic is my 2nd Shiwa is my third I can work on my language skills in English but I feel that's unnecessary to tell someone that they need to learn English because that just discouraged me to not having the ability to contribute something to the worldArabAmazigh12 (talk) 14:03, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with kwami and Andy that the quality of your English is not a reason for blocking you, but I am confident that that was not the reason why you were blocked. It is unfortunate that the blocking admin, Future Perfect at Sunrise, did not leave you a message explaining the reason for your block; his reference to Wikipedia:Competence is required indicates as a reason that your edits are disruptive even though you don’t intend them to be, and that it is doubtful you will be able to correct your behavior.

I think that jpgordon, the admin declining your unblock request, expressed himself poorly: He started well, saying, “your competence to edit Wikipedia cooperatively with other editors is in question.” But his complaint about your English was not a reason to decline. I suspect that what he meant was you didn’t explain clearly that you now understand the reason for your block and that you will not do it again: That is a reason to decline.

So what was the reason for your block? In the first place it is not (as you said in your unblock request) because you made a complaint against kwami. I am sorry if my reference above to Wikipedia:Don't shoot yourself in the foot made you think that was the reason for the block.

As I understand it, the reason for the block is that you persistently changed data without providing a reliable source. I understand your concern that the data may be old, but Wikipedia policy requires that content must be verifiable (you can't just guess what the current data would be). If you cannot accept that policy, you will not fit in at Wikipedia. See kwami’s posts on this page—particularly his post above in this section:

”a question of whether he can be relied on to present reliable information, to ensure that a ref actually supports his claims (e.g. not changing data while keeping the old ref, as if that were its source), and to not cherry-pick sources when he does use them.”

If you understand and accept that, read Guide to appealing blocks, and try again to request unblocking, stating clearly that you understand that is the reason for the block and that you will not do it again.

If you are unblocked, I recommend that before making controversial edits, you discuss them on the article talk pages, on kwami’s talk page, or at the Teahouse. —teb728 t c 10:00, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

ArabAmazigh12 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I now understand why I was blocked I was blocked because I persistently changed the data without providing a reliable source which is needed for any content on Wikipedia meant no harm of course it wasn't intentionally I made an Error on that I Saw that our data was a bit outdated and I a apologize for it I have learnt from my mistake it was a rookie move id like to be given another chance to prove myself we all have our second chance and i have seen my errors Wikipedia is a place were facts and sources that a reliable if we change something we need a reason for it and that i now understand please give me another shot at proving myself thank youArabAmazigh12 (talk) 02:40, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Our competence requirements include the ability to write a coherent sentence. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:32, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

• Comment: I'm not so much protesting the block, as much as I am disinclined to view this as a competency issue. Incompetence implies that an editor is acting in good faith. I am unfamiliar with this editor's entire body of edits, but his July 2015 edits to Semitic languages (example) -- and accompanying behavior (example) -- left a bad taste in my mouth and I strongly doubt these edits were made in good faith. See #July_2015 earlier on this page (including the editor's assertion that he is an Oromo linguist). I believe the edits in question were either (at worst) deliberate misinformation or (at best) a deliberate refusal to verify facts for one's self. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:03, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ArabAmazigh12. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]