![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Hi. When you recently edited 1999 İzmit earthquake, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kocaeli, Sakarya and Gölcük ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Note: the Newsletter is "collapsed" for convenience. To see the full letter, click on the "show" button at the right end of the blue bar.
The WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This Newsletter was delivered by Wesley ☀ Mouse 13:09, 2 June 2012 (UTC). If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list.
WikiProject Eurovision: This is a reminder to all members of Project Eurovision, that there is still an ongoing RfC discussion taking place at the project talk page. It is vital that everyone participates in this discussion, as it concerns the future manual of style and article layout in regards to Eurovision Song Contest by Year and Junior Eurovision Song Contest by Year articles. This is your ideal opportunity to contribute suggestions and ideas on a major issue, which will reflect on the way these articles will be written in future. Thank You! EdwardsBot ( talk) 14:11, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Seems like I have found a fellow citizen of mine :) Regarding your edits in the article of Northern Cyprus, I want to note something. Contributing to English Wikipedia means adopting to the place and using names which are well-established or considered by third-party users as neutral or on which we have a consensus. These are the cases in invasion, Apostolos Andreas and so forth. Even if one personally disagrees, they have to use that name. Insisting on changing them would be considered disruptive. So I would advise you to edit in this context. -- Seksen ( talk) 15:49, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Selamlar. Daha önce de belirttiğim gibi özellikle İngilizce Vikipedi'ye katkıda bulunmak için belirli şeyleri kabullenmek gerekiyor. Elbette ki kişisel olarak kabul ettiğimiz doğrular olduğumuz için, olayın taraflarından birine mensup olduğumuz için alışmak kolay değil. İtiraf etmeliyim ki benim için de kolay olmadı. Bu bağlamda Vikipedi'de bir şeyleri bu gereklilikten dolayı kabullenmek ile kişisel olarak kabullenmek arasında fark olduğunu belirtmek isterim. Kişisel olarak 74 harekatına "işgal" demezsiniz, ben de demem; ama buradayken kabullenmek zorundayım denilmesini. Nedenlerini bu uzuunca yazıda açıklayacağım :)
Vikipedi'de tarafsız bakış açısı dediğimiz bir kural var. Maddeleri buna uygun yazmak zorundayız. Bunu aşağıda açıklayacağım. Ayrıca madde adlarında ve içlerinde İngilizcedeki yaygın kullanımlar kullanılıyor. Zafer Burnu örneğinde İngilizcede yaygın olarak "Cape Apostolos Andreas" kullanıyor (Google Books aramaları bir fikir verebilir). Bu nedenle bu kullanılmak zorunda. Bu değiştirilebilecek bir durum değil. Bunu kabul etmemek bir şey getirmeyecektir.
Adlara fazla takılınmaması gerektiğini düşünüyorum ben. Kullanıcılara da. Karşımızdaki ister Rum olsun, ister üçüncü ülkeden biri, sunduğu argümanlara odaklanılmalı. Aksi halde üretken bir ortam oluşmaz, sonuç getirmeyen, kısır tartışmalara sürüklenilir. Eğer katılmadığımız bir fikirleri varsa bunu "sen Rumsun, onun için böyle yapıyorsun!" şeklinde değil, onun bakış açısını anlamaya çalışıp, olayın bir diğer tarafı daha olduğunu ve bu tarafın da görüşlerinin böyle olduğunu kabul edip ve bu görüşlere saygı gösterip, bunun ardından katılmadığımız noktaları kibarca dile getirerek ifade etmeliyiz. Değişikliğiniz geri alınırsa çok çok sebebini açıklayarak (ünlemlerden mümkün olduğunca kaçının) bir veya iki defa geri alın (dördüncüde değişiklik yapmanız engellenebilir), daha sonra tartışma sayfasına taşıyın. Vikipedi'de kişiler üzerine yorum yapmak hoş karşılanmaz. Bir önceki paragrafta tarafsız bakış açısından bahsetmiştim. Tabii sahip olduğunuz bakış açısına göre bunun yorumlanışı değişiyor. Yunanlı bir kullanıcı KKTC'deki bir yeri anlatırken uluslararası toplum tarafından işgal altında kabul edildiğine vurgu yapmak isteyebilir; ama Türk bir kullanıcı bu vurguya gerek olmadığını söyleyecektir. Bu durumlarda işte az önce söylediklerim çok önemli. Her iki tarafın da argümanlarının sunulduğu tartışmalarda genelde üçüncü parti kullanıcılar iki tarafın görüşlerini değerlendirerek tarafsız, tercihen herkes için kabul edilebilir bir çözüm bulmaya çalışıyor. "İşgal" olayında üçüncü parti kullanıcılar da tarafsız kullanıcılar bunun doğru kullanım olduğunu düşünüyor, bu daha önce tartışıldığı için defa defa gündeme getirilmesi hoş karşılanmıyor. Eğer üçüncü parti kullanıcılar yoksa kullanıcılar arasında (geçici de olsa) bir anlaşmaya varılarak (ki bu anlaşmaya varılamazsa genelde tartışmalı değişiklikten önceki sürüm oluyor, standart uygulama böyle) sorun çözülüyor.
Uzun lafın kısası, burada esas olan Vikipedi'nin savaş alanı olmadığını unutmamak, olayların diğer bakış açılarına saygı gösterip kibarca tartışabilmek ve yeri geldiğinde kişisel görüşlerimize uygun düşmese de bazı şeyleri kabul edebilmek. Bunlar unutulmadığında verim doğuyor, kazanan maddeler oluyor, kazanan Vikipedi oluyor.
Yardımcı olabildiysem ne mutlu bana. İleride de danışmaktan çekinmeyin lütfen. Eyi çalışmalar :)
-- Seksen ( talk) 19:47, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
The message above in English:
Hi. As I have said before, one need to accept things especially in order to be able to contribute to English Wikipedia. Of course as we all have our own truths, and as we belong to one of the sides of the dispute, it is not easy to adapt. To be honest, it was not easy for me either. In this context, I want to note that accepting something on Wikipedia and accepting something personally are different things. Personally, you might not call the operation in 1974 an "invasion", neither I do, but here you must accept it to be called an "invasion". I am going to explain why in this long, long message :)
There is a rule we call the neutral point of view in Wikipedia. We need to write articles in accordance to this. I will explain it further below. Furthermore, common names are used in article names or inside articles. In the case of Cape Victory, the common English usage is "Cape Apostolos Andreas" (Google Books search results might provide you with an idea). This means that this name has to be used. This is not something that can be changed. Not accepting this would not produce anything.
I think that one must not stick to names in Wikipedia. And neither to users. We can be talking to a Greek or a person from another country and descent, we need to focus on their arguments. If this is not done, a productive environment is not formed and this results in unproductive discussions. If they have an idea you disagree with, don't say, "oh, you are a Greek, that's why you are doing this!". Instead of this, try to understand his/her viewpoint, accept that there is another side to that discussion and that side thinks like that, and respect those views, and then express the points you do not agree with in a polite manner. If your edit is reverted, you may bring it back one of two times adequately explaining it reason (preferably without explanation marks), and then start a discussion in the talk page. Commenting on users is discouraged in Wikipedia. I have mentioned the neutral point of view in the previous paragraph. Of course, the way you perceive this depends on your viewpoint. A Greek user may like to stress the fact that it is considered to be occupied by the international community in an article about, say, a place in the TRNC, whereas a Turkish user would say that this emphasis is unnecessary. In these cases, what I have said is very important. In discussion where arguments of both sides are presented, third-party users are often involved in finding a neutral solution which would preferably satisfy everyone. In the case of "invasion", third-party users think that this is the correct use and as this issue has been discussed before, new attempts to discuss this naming are often not welcomed.
So, in short, what it important is not to forget that Wikipedia is not a battleground, to respect other points of view, to discuss in a polite manner and to be able to accept things even if we do not accept them in person. If these are remembered, the result is often productivity, and it is the articles and Wikipedia that wins.
I am glad if I have been helpful. Do not hesitate to ask should you have any questions. Have a nice night :)
-- Seksen ( talk) 19:47, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
See Talk:History of the Falkland Islands, please note I disagree with the comments there. Wee Curry Monster talk 14:35, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
• WikiProject News • Issue #20 • July 2012
| ||
Home • Talk • Portal • Newsdesk • Archives | ||
Bienvenue! Willkommen! Welcome! Please be warm-hearted in encouraging everyone to do their best to contribute to all Eurovision-related Wikipedia articles, and welcome our new members to the project. It is easy for editors to get into conflict with each other, and things can get very nasty on the most trivial of issues, whether that be on the language of songs, the names of certain countries, or how we deal with incidents at the contest. In such circumstances it is worth remembering one thing: we are all here to build an encyclopedia, and the contribution of Eurovision to human knowledge can only be given justice if we work together and make articles, not drama!
Happy editing!
|
| |
Members The project had 90 members, with eighty-six active, and four inactive members at the time of publication. If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list Have you encountered an editor who is interested in Eurovision? Then why not place our invitation template on their talk page and welcome them to the project.. | ||
We would like to welcome the following new members who joined since our June publication. (in alphabetical order) |
We would like to bid farewell and show our appreciation to the following members who have decided to depart the project for personal reasons since our June publication. (in alphabetical order) |
Jac16888 Talk 16:40, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Your monthly WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter has arrived. To open click "show". | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WikiProject Newsletter - August 2012
| ||||||
HOME • TALK • PORTAL • NEWSDESK • ARCHIVES | ||||||
Bienvenue! Willkommen! Welcome! Please be warm-hearted in encouraging everyone to do their best to contribute to all Eurovision-related Wikipedia articles, and welcome our new members to the project. The past month has been an eventful one for the project as a whole. Old dramas have closed, new ones have begun. Four articles nominated for GA review, three of them passed and promoted, with one of them making ProjectEurovision history by being the first annual contest article to ever achieve GA status. If it wasn't for the hard work and the many hours of team collaborations that we have endured on this project, then those accolades would never have been gained. Each of those article promotions are as a result of your continuous determination to be part of the best team this project has seen for a long time. There is a teamwork barnstar with this newsletter for you to cherish and you may display the award on your pages if you wish. Now we look to the months ahead and start preparations for Malmo 2013, and see if we can work to getting another annual article to GA status. Here's to you - the team of excellence.
Happy editing! | ||||||
![]()
|
| |||||
Members The project had 92 members, with eighty-eight active, and four inactive members at the time of publication. If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list Have you encountered an editor who is interested in Eurovision? Then why not place our invitation template on their talk page and welcome them to the project..
| ||||||
|
Hello,
Please note that there have been some changes to operations surrounding Eurovision articles, these being that:
If you have any questions, please ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision.
You are receiving this message since you are listed as a member of WikiProject Eurovision. If you are no longer interested in contributing to Eurovision articles, please remove your username from this page.
Delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 14:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC) on behalf of Project Eurovision
Your monthly WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter has arrived. To open click "show". | ||
---|---|---|
Issue: XXII
| ||
HOME • TALK • PORTAL • NEWSDESK • ARCHIVES | ||
Bienvenue! Willkommen! Welcome! Please be warm-hearted in encouraging everyone to do their best to contribute to all Eurovision-related Wikipedia articles, and welcome our new members to the project. Remember that this project can only operate if we act in a cooperative manner and engage in discussions regarding article matters. It is seen as best practice to put forward ideas to other members of the project before rushing ahead and acting on a potential falsifying action. If you feel an article may warrant a deletion, why not test the waters by opening a discussion on the article's talk page or our very own project talk page - before rushing off and submitting an AfD. It saves wasting time nominating an article for deletion which could end up with an overwhelming "keep" by other editors. Communicating with each other is a vital tool and a skill that may prove advantageous in real-life scenarios. Also be on the look out for potential new members to the project. Post {{subst:EurovisionInvite}} (which will produced this template) on any user page you think is interested to join the WikiProject, to officially invite them to join.
| ||
|
| |
Members The project had 90 members, with eighty-six active, and four inactive members at the time of publication. If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list Have you encountered an editor who is interested in Eurovision? Then why not place our invitation template on their talk page and welcome them to the project.. | ||
EdwardsBot (
talk)
03:19, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Eurovision Mini Memorandum 16 September 2012
To discontinue receiving Eurovision newsletters and mini memorandums, please remove your name from
here.
|
This mini memorandum has been delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 13:51, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I ask you to please set politics and culture aside and please look at a map. You will see that Turkey has more land mass in Asia rather than in Europe. Although Turkey is a candidate of the European Union; Turkey is also a member of numerous Asian regional bodies. You are correct to state that Armenia is stated in some articles as being Europe. Armenia is located in Asia, including Cyprus even though it is a member of the European Union. Please take to mind that just because a country joins a regional body, does not mean that its geography has changed. Germany, for example is a member of the Mediterranean Union. Germany obviously does not border the Mediterranean. Spain has territory in Africa. Spain is not in Africa. Egypt has the Sinai peninsula in Asia. However, people do not regard Egypt as an Asian country. There are many examples to give, however the facts are simple to see.
The references you gave were two. However, you seemed to overlook the part where it says "South eastern Europe and south western Asia." The CIA website states the same as well as the Turkish government sponsored website of goTurkey [1]. This website states that the Marmara region is only 8% of Turkey. Istanbul is in this region and that is what makes Turkey only partially within the European continent. Why overlook the other 92% of the country which is within Asia?
I have been an editing member in Wikipeida for five years, and you are not the first to bring up the question of whether or not Turkey is part of Asia or Europe. The general consensus has been that Turkey is within Asia, that is why almost all of the articles (minus the ones you just changed) place Turkey in Asia. Please refer to the numerous talk pages. Aquintero ( talk) 18:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Please see Runaway edit-warring by Maurice07. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 02:22, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 23:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 10:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi there; napan? Please indicate your choice of pics at the discussion page of Istanbul article. Thanks. -- E4024 ( talk) 23:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 22:13, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello Maurice. Are you interested to share your two cents at Talk:Taiwan#Split? (Interestingly, contributors in both Talk:Taiwan#Split and Talk:Cyprus#Split the article made use of arguments such as "insignificant", "people won't understand", and "people who aren't familiar will be confused".) 14.0.208.68 ( talk) 23:31, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Turkey shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 22:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at
Turkey, you may be
blocked from editing. Thank you.
Δρ.Κ.
λόγος
πράξις
22:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Template:Countries and territories of the Mediterranean Sea shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. I told you before but I am telling you again: Please read the message on top of the template: PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS TEMPLATE IS ONLY MEANT TO INCLUDE THOSE COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES RECOGNISED BY A MAJORITY OF UNITED NATIONS MEMBERS). Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 02:46, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 15:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
It is here. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 00:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Languages of Europe shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 14:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Xanthi shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 14:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello Maurice07. I recently restored Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Maurice07 reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: ). This report had been archived by the bot with no formal closure.
It looks to me that you have engaged in long-term edit warring at List of diplomatic missions of the United Kingdom. You had already been blocked last September for a previous episode of the same war, per: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive770#Runaway edit-warring by Maurice07. Whether Turkey is in Europe or not is a familiar issue for admins who watch these articles, and it is not a surprise to see people reverting this back and forth. You are expected to seek consensus for your views in a dispute like that. Can you point to any discussion where your position is supported?
You may be able to avoid sanctions for long-term edit warring if you will agree to wait for consensus before making any further edits which assume that Turkey is in Europe. If you accept this offer, please respond at the noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 18:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Languages of Europe shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 01:31, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Languages of Europe shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 01:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
The report is filed at Maurice07. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 04:05, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
— Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 10:08, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Following a thread at Arbitration Enforcement, you are topic banned from editing in the Greek-Turkish relations area, broadly interpreted. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 20:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mediterranean Sea, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Split and Hatay ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to Armenia- Azerbaijan and related conflicts. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you continue to misconduct yourself on pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the " Final decision" section of the decision page.
Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.
-- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."
This is to enforce the ArbCom ruling on Macedonia, and to address your continuing edit warring issue. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 15:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 23:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ahmet Davutoğlu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NATO headquarters ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 12:38, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Tam da "Midnight Express" filmi ile yaratılmak istenen klişeleşmiş imajı desteklemişsin. Sarai Sierra cinayeti ile de uyumlu bir atmosfer olmuş. "Karanlık, ışıksız, korkutucu, kaotik, kasvetli, itici, yobaz bir şehir" imajı. 88.251.90.139 ( talk) 14:58, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Your disruptive edits to [2] is discussed at WP:ANI [3]. Jeppiz ( talk) 21:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure prohibiting all administrators "from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page." Administrators who reverse an arbitration enforcement block, such as this one, without clear authorisation will be summarily desysopped.
Adem ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Decline reason:
Procedural decline per WP:AEBLOCK. Yunshui 雲 水 11:39, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
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.
First off, as this is an AE block, this will have to be procedurally declined; the process for appealing AE sanctions is laid out in the unblock request and at the top of WP:AE. Secondly, for any reviewing admins, see User talk:The Blade of the Northern Lights#Maurice07 evading AE topic ban on Greek-related topics through IP for context; I'm finding it very hard to believe the IP and Maurice07 are separate people. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい) 19:42, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Check out the article list of countries by Human Development Index and then please correct your mistake in the infobox of the Turkey article. 88.251.85.34 ( talk) 22:03, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 04:11, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure prohibiting administrators "from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page." Administrators who reverse an arbitration enforcement block, such as this one, without clear authorisation will be summarily desysopped.
Adem ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Decline reason:
Procedural decline - this is an Arbitration Committee block enforced by The Blade of the Northern Lights for the Committee. No admin will overturn this block here. You must follow the instructions in the second line of the box above - the one with the scales in it - if you wish to be unblocked. Peridon ( talk) 22:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
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.
I've blocked you for one week for edit warring at
World Tourism rankings. I find it staggering that you're still repeating the same mistakes you made
six months ago. Let me make this clear - no matter how much you disagree with someone, edit warring is unacceptable in any case. The only case in which you may revert users like that is when someone is blatantly, maliciously
vandalizing the project. Otherwise, don't do it.
I've blocked you for one week. However, please note that you are at the end of your rope; if this happens again, there will be serious repercussions.
You are welcome to ask any questions here if you feel I haven't explained something adequately. Regards,
m.o.p
14:16, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Adem ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Decline reason:
You'll really need to address your own edit warring to have your unblock request considered. You've been blocked, what, six times in six months? You need to figure out why that's happening. -- jpgordon ::==( o ) 15:00, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
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.
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 16:04, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Hijab by country shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 22:14, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello, these were the only proof I could find:
Regards, Aquintero, ( talk), 12:14, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Armenia shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 10:54, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at
Armenia, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Δρ.Κ.
λόγος
πράξις
21:44, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure prohibiting administrators "from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page." Administrators who reverse an arbitration enforcement block, such as this one, without clear authorisation will be summarily desysopped.
You have been reported under AA2 for your disruption in Armenian related articles. Proudbolsahye ( talk) 18:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Maurice07, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 23:58, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 14:19, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 12:20, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Economy of Vietnam may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 23:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Economy of Sweden may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 23:40, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
You provided a link, but it doesn't lead anywhere.-- eh bien mon prince ( talk) 09:14, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Eurovision Mini Memorandum 30 June 2013
There are a couple of discussions taking place via the project talk page that require urgent attention from as many members as possible. These are...
To discontinue receiving Eurovision newsletters and mini memorandums, please remove your name from
here.
|
This memo was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 17:44, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
You have been reported here. Proudbolsahye ( talk) 18:40, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Issue XXXII
![]() |
Project Eurovision monthly
|
Click image below to read full edition![]() | ||||
| ||||||
At the time of publication the project statistics were as follows
| ||||||
Total Number of Members | Active Members | Inactive Members | Total Number of Articles | Number of Good Articles | Number of Featured Articles | Require Improvements |
71 | 48 | 23 | 4843 | 16 | 2 | 1413 |
To discontinue receiving Eurovision newsletters and mini memorandums, please remove your name from
here.
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 18:57, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Please do not violate your sanctions again: [6]. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 02:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Checking further, this is the second time you removed the Church picture using also a misleading edit-summary:
[7]. Let me remind you: You are banned from Greek-Turkish relations broadly construed. Next stop will be Arbitration Enforcement.
Δρ.Κ.
λόγος
πράξις
02:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Hi. When you recently edited 1999 İzmit earthquake, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kocaeli, Sakarya and Gölcük ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Note: the Newsletter is "collapsed" for convenience. To see the full letter, click on the "show" button at the right end of the blue bar.
The WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This Newsletter was delivered by Wesley ☀ Mouse 13:09, 2 June 2012 (UTC). If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list.
WikiProject Eurovision: This is a reminder to all members of Project Eurovision, that there is still an ongoing RfC discussion taking place at the project talk page. It is vital that everyone participates in this discussion, as it concerns the future manual of style and article layout in regards to Eurovision Song Contest by Year and Junior Eurovision Song Contest by Year articles. This is your ideal opportunity to contribute suggestions and ideas on a major issue, which will reflect on the way these articles will be written in future. Thank You! EdwardsBot ( talk) 14:11, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Seems like I have found a fellow citizen of mine :) Regarding your edits in the article of Northern Cyprus, I want to note something. Contributing to English Wikipedia means adopting to the place and using names which are well-established or considered by third-party users as neutral or on which we have a consensus. These are the cases in invasion, Apostolos Andreas and so forth. Even if one personally disagrees, they have to use that name. Insisting on changing them would be considered disruptive. So I would advise you to edit in this context. -- Seksen ( talk) 15:49, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Selamlar. Daha önce de belirttiğim gibi özellikle İngilizce Vikipedi'ye katkıda bulunmak için belirli şeyleri kabullenmek gerekiyor. Elbette ki kişisel olarak kabul ettiğimiz doğrular olduğumuz için, olayın taraflarından birine mensup olduğumuz için alışmak kolay değil. İtiraf etmeliyim ki benim için de kolay olmadı. Bu bağlamda Vikipedi'de bir şeyleri bu gereklilikten dolayı kabullenmek ile kişisel olarak kabullenmek arasında fark olduğunu belirtmek isterim. Kişisel olarak 74 harekatına "işgal" demezsiniz, ben de demem; ama buradayken kabullenmek zorundayım denilmesini. Nedenlerini bu uzuunca yazıda açıklayacağım :)
Vikipedi'de tarafsız bakış açısı dediğimiz bir kural var. Maddeleri buna uygun yazmak zorundayız. Bunu aşağıda açıklayacağım. Ayrıca madde adlarında ve içlerinde İngilizcedeki yaygın kullanımlar kullanılıyor. Zafer Burnu örneğinde İngilizcede yaygın olarak "Cape Apostolos Andreas" kullanıyor (Google Books aramaları bir fikir verebilir). Bu nedenle bu kullanılmak zorunda. Bu değiştirilebilecek bir durum değil. Bunu kabul etmemek bir şey getirmeyecektir.
Adlara fazla takılınmaması gerektiğini düşünüyorum ben. Kullanıcılara da. Karşımızdaki ister Rum olsun, ister üçüncü ülkeden biri, sunduğu argümanlara odaklanılmalı. Aksi halde üretken bir ortam oluşmaz, sonuç getirmeyen, kısır tartışmalara sürüklenilir. Eğer katılmadığımız bir fikirleri varsa bunu "sen Rumsun, onun için böyle yapıyorsun!" şeklinde değil, onun bakış açısını anlamaya çalışıp, olayın bir diğer tarafı daha olduğunu ve bu tarafın da görüşlerinin böyle olduğunu kabul edip ve bu görüşlere saygı gösterip, bunun ardından katılmadığımız noktaları kibarca dile getirerek ifade etmeliyiz. Değişikliğiniz geri alınırsa çok çok sebebini açıklayarak (ünlemlerden mümkün olduğunca kaçının) bir veya iki defa geri alın (dördüncüde değişiklik yapmanız engellenebilir), daha sonra tartışma sayfasına taşıyın. Vikipedi'de kişiler üzerine yorum yapmak hoş karşılanmaz. Bir önceki paragrafta tarafsız bakış açısından bahsetmiştim. Tabii sahip olduğunuz bakış açısına göre bunun yorumlanışı değişiyor. Yunanlı bir kullanıcı KKTC'deki bir yeri anlatırken uluslararası toplum tarafından işgal altında kabul edildiğine vurgu yapmak isteyebilir; ama Türk bir kullanıcı bu vurguya gerek olmadığını söyleyecektir. Bu durumlarda işte az önce söylediklerim çok önemli. Her iki tarafın da argümanlarının sunulduğu tartışmalarda genelde üçüncü parti kullanıcılar iki tarafın görüşlerini değerlendirerek tarafsız, tercihen herkes için kabul edilebilir bir çözüm bulmaya çalışıyor. "İşgal" olayında üçüncü parti kullanıcılar da tarafsız kullanıcılar bunun doğru kullanım olduğunu düşünüyor, bu daha önce tartışıldığı için defa defa gündeme getirilmesi hoş karşılanmıyor. Eğer üçüncü parti kullanıcılar yoksa kullanıcılar arasında (geçici de olsa) bir anlaşmaya varılarak (ki bu anlaşmaya varılamazsa genelde tartışmalı değişiklikten önceki sürüm oluyor, standart uygulama böyle) sorun çözülüyor.
Uzun lafın kısası, burada esas olan Vikipedi'nin savaş alanı olmadığını unutmamak, olayların diğer bakış açılarına saygı gösterip kibarca tartışabilmek ve yeri geldiğinde kişisel görüşlerimize uygun düşmese de bazı şeyleri kabul edebilmek. Bunlar unutulmadığında verim doğuyor, kazanan maddeler oluyor, kazanan Vikipedi oluyor.
Yardımcı olabildiysem ne mutlu bana. İleride de danışmaktan çekinmeyin lütfen. Eyi çalışmalar :)
-- Seksen ( talk) 19:47, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
The message above in English:
Hi. As I have said before, one need to accept things especially in order to be able to contribute to English Wikipedia. Of course as we all have our own truths, and as we belong to one of the sides of the dispute, it is not easy to adapt. To be honest, it was not easy for me either. In this context, I want to note that accepting something on Wikipedia and accepting something personally are different things. Personally, you might not call the operation in 1974 an "invasion", neither I do, but here you must accept it to be called an "invasion". I am going to explain why in this long, long message :)
There is a rule we call the neutral point of view in Wikipedia. We need to write articles in accordance to this. I will explain it further below. Furthermore, common names are used in article names or inside articles. In the case of Cape Victory, the common English usage is "Cape Apostolos Andreas" (Google Books search results might provide you with an idea). This means that this name has to be used. This is not something that can be changed. Not accepting this would not produce anything.
I think that one must not stick to names in Wikipedia. And neither to users. We can be talking to a Greek or a person from another country and descent, we need to focus on their arguments. If this is not done, a productive environment is not formed and this results in unproductive discussions. If they have an idea you disagree with, don't say, "oh, you are a Greek, that's why you are doing this!". Instead of this, try to understand his/her viewpoint, accept that there is another side to that discussion and that side thinks like that, and respect those views, and then express the points you do not agree with in a polite manner. If your edit is reverted, you may bring it back one of two times adequately explaining it reason (preferably without explanation marks), and then start a discussion in the talk page. Commenting on users is discouraged in Wikipedia. I have mentioned the neutral point of view in the previous paragraph. Of course, the way you perceive this depends on your viewpoint. A Greek user may like to stress the fact that it is considered to be occupied by the international community in an article about, say, a place in the TRNC, whereas a Turkish user would say that this emphasis is unnecessary. In these cases, what I have said is very important. In discussion where arguments of both sides are presented, third-party users are often involved in finding a neutral solution which would preferably satisfy everyone. In the case of "invasion", third-party users think that this is the correct use and as this issue has been discussed before, new attempts to discuss this naming are often not welcomed.
So, in short, what it important is not to forget that Wikipedia is not a battleground, to respect other points of view, to discuss in a polite manner and to be able to accept things even if we do not accept them in person. If these are remembered, the result is often productivity, and it is the articles and Wikipedia that wins.
I am glad if I have been helpful. Do not hesitate to ask should you have any questions. Have a nice night :)
-- Seksen ( talk) 19:47, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
See Talk:History of the Falkland Islands, please note I disagree with the comments there. Wee Curry Monster talk 14:35, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
• WikiProject News • Issue #20 • July 2012
| ||
Home • Talk • Portal • Newsdesk • Archives | ||
Bienvenue! Willkommen! Welcome! Please be warm-hearted in encouraging everyone to do their best to contribute to all Eurovision-related Wikipedia articles, and welcome our new members to the project. It is easy for editors to get into conflict with each other, and things can get very nasty on the most trivial of issues, whether that be on the language of songs, the names of certain countries, or how we deal with incidents at the contest. In such circumstances it is worth remembering one thing: we are all here to build an encyclopedia, and the contribution of Eurovision to human knowledge can only be given justice if we work together and make articles, not drama!
Happy editing!
|
| |
Members The project had 90 members, with eighty-six active, and four inactive members at the time of publication. If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list Have you encountered an editor who is interested in Eurovision? Then why not place our invitation template on their talk page and welcome them to the project.. | ||
We would like to welcome the following new members who joined since our June publication. (in alphabetical order) |
We would like to bid farewell and show our appreciation to the following members who have decided to depart the project for personal reasons since our June publication. (in alphabetical order) |
Jac16888 Talk 16:40, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Your monthly WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter has arrived. To open click "show". | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WikiProject Newsletter - August 2012
| ||||||
HOME • TALK • PORTAL • NEWSDESK • ARCHIVES | ||||||
Bienvenue! Willkommen! Welcome! Please be warm-hearted in encouraging everyone to do their best to contribute to all Eurovision-related Wikipedia articles, and welcome our new members to the project. The past month has been an eventful one for the project as a whole. Old dramas have closed, new ones have begun. Four articles nominated for GA review, three of them passed and promoted, with one of them making ProjectEurovision history by being the first annual contest article to ever achieve GA status. If it wasn't for the hard work and the many hours of team collaborations that we have endured on this project, then those accolades would never have been gained. Each of those article promotions are as a result of your continuous determination to be part of the best team this project has seen for a long time. There is a teamwork barnstar with this newsletter for you to cherish and you may display the award on your pages if you wish. Now we look to the months ahead and start preparations for Malmo 2013, and see if we can work to getting another annual article to GA status. Here's to you - the team of excellence.
Happy editing! | ||||||
![]()
|
| |||||
Members The project had 92 members, with eighty-eight active, and four inactive members at the time of publication. If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list Have you encountered an editor who is interested in Eurovision? Then why not place our invitation template on their talk page and welcome them to the project..
| ||||||
|
Hello,
Please note that there have been some changes to operations surrounding Eurovision articles, these being that:
If you have any questions, please ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision.
You are receiving this message since you are listed as a member of WikiProject Eurovision. If you are no longer interested in contributing to Eurovision articles, please remove your username from this page.
Delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 14:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC) on behalf of Project Eurovision
Your monthly WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter has arrived. To open click "show". | ||
---|---|---|
Issue: XXII
| ||
HOME • TALK • PORTAL • NEWSDESK • ARCHIVES | ||
Bienvenue! Willkommen! Welcome! Please be warm-hearted in encouraging everyone to do their best to contribute to all Eurovision-related Wikipedia articles, and welcome our new members to the project. Remember that this project can only operate if we act in a cooperative manner and engage in discussions regarding article matters. It is seen as best practice to put forward ideas to other members of the project before rushing ahead and acting on a potential falsifying action. If you feel an article may warrant a deletion, why not test the waters by opening a discussion on the article's talk page or our very own project talk page - before rushing off and submitting an AfD. It saves wasting time nominating an article for deletion which could end up with an overwhelming "keep" by other editors. Communicating with each other is a vital tool and a skill that may prove advantageous in real-life scenarios. Also be on the look out for potential new members to the project. Post {{subst:EurovisionInvite}} (which will produced this template) on any user page you think is interested to join the WikiProject, to officially invite them to join.
| ||
|
| |
Members The project had 90 members, with eighty-six active, and four inactive members at the time of publication. If you are no longer interested in WikiProject Eurovision then please remove your name from this list Have you encountered an editor who is interested in Eurovision? Then why not place our invitation template on their talk page and welcome them to the project.. | ||
EdwardsBot (
talk)
03:19, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Eurovision Mini Memorandum 16 September 2012
To discontinue receiving Eurovision newsletters and mini memorandums, please remove your name from
here.
|
This mini memorandum has been delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 13:51, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I ask you to please set politics and culture aside and please look at a map. You will see that Turkey has more land mass in Asia rather than in Europe. Although Turkey is a candidate of the European Union; Turkey is also a member of numerous Asian regional bodies. You are correct to state that Armenia is stated in some articles as being Europe. Armenia is located in Asia, including Cyprus even though it is a member of the European Union. Please take to mind that just because a country joins a regional body, does not mean that its geography has changed. Germany, for example is a member of the Mediterranean Union. Germany obviously does not border the Mediterranean. Spain has territory in Africa. Spain is not in Africa. Egypt has the Sinai peninsula in Asia. However, people do not regard Egypt as an Asian country. There are many examples to give, however the facts are simple to see.
The references you gave were two. However, you seemed to overlook the part where it says "South eastern Europe and south western Asia." The CIA website states the same as well as the Turkish government sponsored website of goTurkey [1]. This website states that the Marmara region is only 8% of Turkey. Istanbul is in this region and that is what makes Turkey only partially within the European continent. Why overlook the other 92% of the country which is within Asia?
I have been an editing member in Wikipeida for five years, and you are not the first to bring up the question of whether or not Turkey is part of Asia or Europe. The general consensus has been that Turkey is within Asia, that is why almost all of the articles (minus the ones you just changed) place Turkey in Asia. Please refer to the numerous talk pages. Aquintero ( talk) 18:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Please see Runaway edit-warring by Maurice07. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 02:22, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 23:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 10:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi there; napan? Please indicate your choice of pics at the discussion page of Istanbul article. Thanks. -- E4024 ( talk) 23:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 22:13, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello Maurice. Are you interested to share your two cents at Talk:Taiwan#Split? (Interestingly, contributors in both Talk:Taiwan#Split and Talk:Cyprus#Split the article made use of arguments such as "insignificant", "people won't understand", and "people who aren't familiar will be confused".) 14.0.208.68 ( talk) 23:31, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Turkey shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 22:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at
Turkey, you may be
blocked from editing. Thank you.
Δρ.Κ.
λόγος
πράξις
22:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Template:Countries and territories of the Mediterranean Sea shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. I told you before but I am telling you again: Please read the message on top of the template: PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS TEMPLATE IS ONLY MEANT TO INCLUDE THOSE COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES RECOGNISED BY A MAJORITY OF UNITED NATIONS MEMBERS). Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 02:46, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 15:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
It is here. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 00:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Languages of Europe shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 14:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Xanthi shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 14:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello Maurice07. I recently restored Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Maurice07 reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: ). This report had been archived by the bot with no formal closure.
It looks to me that you have engaged in long-term edit warring at List of diplomatic missions of the United Kingdom. You had already been blocked last September for a previous episode of the same war, per: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive770#Runaway edit-warring by Maurice07. Whether Turkey is in Europe or not is a familiar issue for admins who watch these articles, and it is not a surprise to see people reverting this back and forth. You are expected to seek consensus for your views in a dispute like that. Can you point to any discussion where your position is supported?
You may be able to avoid sanctions for long-term edit warring if you will agree to wait for consensus before making any further edits which assume that Turkey is in Europe. If you accept this offer, please respond at the noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 18:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Languages of Europe shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 01:31, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Languages of Europe shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 01:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
The report is filed at Maurice07. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 04:05, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
— Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 10:08, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Following a thread at Arbitration Enforcement, you are topic banned from editing in the Greek-Turkish relations area, broadly interpreted. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 20:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mediterranean Sea, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Split and Hatay ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to Armenia- Azerbaijan and related conflicts. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you continue to misconduct yourself on pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the " Final decision" section of the decision page.
Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.
-- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."
This is to enforce the ArbCom ruling on Macedonia, and to address your continuing edit warring issue. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 15:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Emmette Hernandez Coleman ( talk) 23:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ahmet Davutoğlu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NATO headquarters ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 12:38, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Tam da "Midnight Express" filmi ile yaratılmak istenen klişeleşmiş imajı desteklemişsin. Sarai Sierra cinayeti ile de uyumlu bir atmosfer olmuş. "Karanlık, ışıksız, korkutucu, kaotik, kasvetli, itici, yobaz bir şehir" imajı. 88.251.90.139 ( talk) 14:58, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Your disruptive edits to [2] is discussed at WP:ANI [3]. Jeppiz ( talk) 21:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure prohibiting all administrators "from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page." Administrators who reverse an arbitration enforcement block, such as this one, without clear authorisation will be summarily desysopped.
Adem ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Decline reason:
Procedural decline per WP:AEBLOCK. Yunshui 雲 水 11:39, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
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.
First off, as this is an AE block, this will have to be procedurally declined; the process for appealing AE sanctions is laid out in the unblock request and at the top of WP:AE. Secondly, for any reviewing admins, see User talk:The Blade of the Northern Lights#Maurice07 evading AE topic ban on Greek-related topics through IP for context; I'm finding it very hard to believe the IP and Maurice07 are separate people. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい) 19:42, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Check out the article list of countries by Human Development Index and then please correct your mistake in the infobox of the Turkey article. 88.251.85.34 ( talk) 22:03, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 04:11, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure prohibiting administrators "from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page." Administrators who reverse an arbitration enforcement block, such as this one, without clear authorisation will be summarily desysopped.
Adem ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Decline reason:
Procedural decline - this is an Arbitration Committee block enforced by The Blade of the Northern Lights for the Committee. No admin will overturn this block here. You must follow the instructions in the second line of the box above - the one with the scales in it - if you wish to be unblocked. Peridon ( talk) 22:36, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
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.
I've blocked you for one week for edit warring at
World Tourism rankings. I find it staggering that you're still repeating the same mistakes you made
six months ago. Let me make this clear - no matter how much you disagree with someone, edit warring is unacceptable in any case. The only case in which you may revert users like that is when someone is blatantly, maliciously
vandalizing the project. Otherwise, don't do it.
I've blocked you for one week. However, please note that you are at the end of your rope; if this happens again, there will be serious repercussions.
You are welcome to ask any questions here if you feel I haven't explained something adequately. Regards,
m.o.p
14:16, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Adem ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Decline reason:
You'll really need to address your own edit warring to have your unblock request considered. You've been blocked, what, six times in six months? You need to figure out why that's happening. -- jpgordon ::==( o ) 15:00, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
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.
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 16:04, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Hijab by country shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 22:14, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello, these were the only proof I could find:
Regards, Aquintero, ( talk), 12:14, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Armenia shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 10:54, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at
Armenia, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Δρ.Κ.
λόγος
πράξις
21:44, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure prohibiting administrators "from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page." Administrators who reverse an arbitration enforcement block, such as this one, without clear authorisation will be summarily desysopped.
You have been reported under AA2 for your disruption in Armenian related articles. Proudbolsahye ( talk) 18:31, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Maurice07, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 23:58, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 14:19, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Your monthly ProjectEurovision newsletter has arrived. Click show to open. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 12:20, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Economy of Vietnam may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 23:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Economy of Sweden may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 23:40, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
You provided a link, but it doesn't lead anywhere.-- eh bien mon prince ( talk) 09:14, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Eurovision Mini Memorandum 30 June 2013
There are a couple of discussions taking place via the project talk page that require urgent attention from as many members as possible. These are...
To discontinue receiving Eurovision newsletters and mini memorandums, please remove your name from
here.
|
This memo was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 17:44, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
You have been reported here. Proudbolsahye ( talk) 18:40, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
Issue XXXII
![]() |
Project Eurovision monthly
|
Click image below to read full edition![]() | ||||
| ||||||
At the time of publication the project statistics were as follows
| ||||||
Total Number of Members | Active Members | Inactive Members | Total Number of Articles | Number of Good Articles | Number of Featured Articles | Require Improvements |
71 | 48 | 23 | 4843 | 16 | 2 | 1413 |
To discontinue receiving Eurovision newsletters and mini memorandums, please remove your name from
here.
|
This newsletter was delivered by EdwardsBot ( talk) 18:57, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Please do not violate your sanctions again: [6]. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 02:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Checking further, this is the second time you removed the Church picture using also a misleading edit-summary:
[7]. Let me remind you: You are banned from Greek-Turkish relations broadly construed. Next stop will be Arbitration Enforcement.
Δρ.Κ.
λόγος
πράξις
02:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC)