Casablanca Derby modificationsEdit

I apologize for not reading the messages you sent to me in the chat , because i don't check out the conversations page too much. But i wanna know which YouTube link you were talking about when you said that my YouTube links are broken . The problem I'm facing is that some Raja supporters are falsifying some facts , i have no problem when they add the 12th "botola" title they won , but when they change Wydad's number of titles from 20 to 15 i must correct that . Thats why i always change it to my last version . Sorry again for not reading your messages , and thanks to check what i said above . Elhaddad77 (talk) 16:40, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes you are right i just noticed the links you were talking about , sorry for the misunderstanding . Elhaddad77 (talk) 17:15, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the post Elhaddad77. While I can understand your desire to want the content of the article to be as accurate as possible, you need to understand that disagreements over article content are expected to be resolved through article tall page discussion and not edit warring. If you continue to simply revert other editors (even IP editors) because you disagree with them as you've been doing at Casablanca derby, you're going to eventually end up being WP:BLOCKed by an administrator. No matter how right you believe you are, you're going to need to stop reverting others everytime you think they're wrong. The best thing to do when you're involved in a disagreement over article content is to start a discussion about it on the article's talk page. Try to engage other editors by explaining how your edits are correct in terms of Wikipedia policies and guidelines and give them a chance to explain their position. Absent any serious violations of Wikipedia policies or guidelines, or absent anything which is clearly a case of vandalism, you should be willing to discuss things with other. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project and this means that disagreements need to resolved collaboratively to avoid problems.
According to your account's contribution history, your posts here on my user talk page appear to be the first time you've tried to discuss anything with anyone on Wikipedia. You're not required to do so, but it sure makes things easier when you do per WP:BRD, especially when others express some concerns about your edits. The first step is always the hardest, but hopefully moving forward you'll be more inclined to discuss things with those you're in disagreement with and try to resolve things collaboratively. You seem to mean well and really want to help improve articles, but all of your good intentions aren't going to matter if you keep reverting and not discussing. Wikipedia is not intended to be a WP:BATTLEGROUND between two sides where one side needs to WP:WIN; sometimes disagreements are resolved that not only makes both sides happy, but also makes Wikipedia better. That's the type of resolution you should be striving to achieve.
As for the YouTube links in the article, I've explained why they were a problem at Talk:Casablanca derby#YouTube videos. If there's something you still don't understand, then feel free to post something in that discussion and either I or someone else will try and help. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Yes you're right , i don't discuss with on wikipedia too much , i think just one or two times . Elhaddad77 (talk) 11:55, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Please can you explain how can i talk with other editors in "article page discussion" ?
Because i didn't understand how to do it , thanks. Elhaddad77 (talk) 11:58, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
You can find out some general information on how to use talk pages at Help:Talk pages and Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, but basically you do the same thing you've already done here and at Talk:Casablanca derby. As long as you try to discuss things your concerns about the article in terms of Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you should be OK. Just try to keep your comments on the content you want to discuss and try to avoid commenting on other editors and turning the discussion in one where it's you against them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:27, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
I understand now thank you for the help , but when will you end my ban ? Elhaddad77 (talk) 15:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
You're not banned or blocked as far as I can tell. To begin with, I'm not a Wikipedia administrator and those are things that only an administrator can do, and as far as I can tell no administrator has done so yet. Another editor complained about your editing at WP:AN#Edit war. I saw that discussion and tried to figure out if there was a way to resolve the problem without an administrator having to block anyone. I posted on your user talk page to advise you of the AN discussion and also suggest that you might need to slightly modify your approach to editing of Casablanca derby; otherwise, you might end up blocked if simply kept reverting other editors every time you thought they were wrong. Edit warring no matter how right you believe you are is not a good way to try and resolve content disputes, and you should be OK as long as you follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution from hereon. Try to follow WP:BRD when you edit and use article talk pages to resolve any disagreements you may have with others over article content or article formatting, etc. Try to leave clear and precise edit summaries that explain why you've made an edit in terms of relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines and avoid using your edit summaries to attack or criticize other editors. Everyone gets frustrated when they edited and everyone makes mistakes, but you're going to start having problems if an administrator starts to see a pattern of making the same mistakes over and over again. That's why it's important to discuss things sometimes since it can help you to avoid making the same mistakes over and over again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:36, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

That draftEdit

Sorry I must have had my eyes closed when I moved that content into draft space lol. I'll nuke it at first opportunity. Zindor (talk) 03:54, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate the message, but I don't think you did anything wrong per se; the content didn't belong on the template's page for obvious reasons, but moving it to the draft namespace seems OK unless it's a clear copyvio or is clearly a case of WP:TNT. The creator seems to be working on other drafts and as long as they don't try and move the drafts to the mainspace themselves, it should be OK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:17, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, yeah. I ended up rejecting it at AfC: not the best look given my stated inclination above, but I'd already familiarised myself with the draft and im confident I was impartial in my decision. I also noticed after my review that some version of the draft got A7'd in mainspace yesterday. Regards, Zindor (talk) 20:11, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Blok E image fair use/qualityEdit


For article "Blok E" (rocket stage for Soviet manned spacecraft LK) I've included a single cropped screenshot from the movie shot in Yuzhmash KB, which manufactured the stage in 1960s-1970s. No other sources of the block being manufactured are known. I've provided the rationale why this constitutes fair use in this case by filling the corresponding form; data from that form is available next to current version of the picture. I'm not sure what other forms need to be filled and why.

At some moment later the picture was replaced with half resolution one, and Wikipedia engine now complains that the picture is of low quality. I think that the previous one was more suitable for Wikipedia, but it's hard to restore the original picture. Avmich (talk) 06:27, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what you're asking about or what you're asking me to try and do. I don't remember recently editing any articles related to Soviet manned space craft. I see from your contribtutions history that you've did uploaded a file back in 2016 called File:Block E composition schema.jpeg. Is that the file you're asking about? FWIW, I don't think the {{PD-ineligible}} that file is licensed under is correct because there's nothing "Common property" about that particular image. Another file you uploaded back in 2014 is File:Block E KB Yuzhnoe.png, but I'm sure what you're asking about it since it's being used in the article Blok E, and appears (at least at first glance) to be correctly licensed with an acceptable non-free use rationale. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 21 October 2020 (UTC)