User talk:Jolofman

Welcome!

Hello, Jolofman, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Doug Weller talk 14:24, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Doug Weller talk 14:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You must not change populations unless you have a newer source

Our articles must accurately reflect their sources. Doug Weller talk 14:27, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You must not misrepresent sources. We also do not accept original research or the removal of sourced content

As the editor has stated in the above thread, articles must accurately represent the sources cited. WP:POV pushing and WP:Original research are also not allowed on Wikipedia as you did here on the Youssou Ndour article. Removing sourced content and entering your own POV as well as misrepresenting the source is frowned upon. Please don't do it again. I don't have a problem with one of the sources you've cited so I'll leave it but the the other source you've cited and misrepresented is a problem. Senegambianamestudy (talk) 22:50, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've mentioned you here. Senegambianamestudy (talk) 23:32, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Hello, I'm Jessicapierce. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Senegalese wrestling have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Jessicapierce (talk) 15:28, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Waalo, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 15:28, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Sabar, you may be blocked from editing. Praxidicae (talk) 20:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — 🦊 21:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS 36523

UTRS appeal #36523 is now closed.

deepfriedokra 2020-10-28 23:10:42 I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. Please describe in greater detail how your editing was unconstructive and how you would edit constructively if unblocked. (Please do not criticize or find fault with anyone else. Calling attention to the faults of others is never a successful strategy; one must address one's own behavior.) Please read Wikipedia's Guide to appealing blocks for more information. (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks) As you still have access to your talk page, please post your unblock request to your user talk page, omitting any off-Wiki personally identifying information. If you have not already done so, please place the following at the bottom of your talk page, filling in "Your reason here "

{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Thank you for your attention to these matters. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:13, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]