Hi Aek973! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC) |
I saw you used a link to the user Koraskadi's talk page multiple times in Wikipedia:Teahouse#How can I act if he ignores this warning?, and I suppose you mean to ping that user to make them aware of the talk thread in the Teahouse. Alas I'm afraid that won't work – as the Help:Notifications page describes it, the user is notified when their user page is linked, not their talk page. If in doubt, you may consider using the {{ reply to}} or the {{ user link}} template (or any of their redirections, e.g. {{ re}} or {{ u}}), which will make appropriate link for you. -- CiaPan ( talk) 12:48, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Please don't change talk threads headers, as you did in Special:Diff/938441194, without an important reason. This invalidates links like that in the section #Pinging other users above, as the target anchor (the part after the # mark) no longer exists in the destination page. -- CiaPan ( talk) 13:22, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
You recently said, "The user User:Junggukhas joined these actions. In raticle Balhae controversies He provokes a war of edits to remove the positions of three parties in order to seek information in favor of the ideology of his countries - South Korea. Help take action against this. He also did it in the Balhae article - the face is clearly coordinated work that violates the rules of sock-puppet."
Wikipedia does not tolerate harsh language directed at editors who make their edits in good faith. Wikipedia is not social media (where anything goes), it's a legitimate online encyclopedia. In addition, you are not qualified to make an accusation of sock puppetry, as you lack access to the tools for detection and have yet to report your suspicions of sock puppetry against User:Junggukhas. Please cite reliable sources for your edits in the future, and avoid resorting to attacks in the hope of bolstering your edits' chances of sticking.-- Quisqualis ( talk) 00:26, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! ⚓ 06:55, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Aek973! You created a thread called Archival by
Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by
Muninnbot, both
automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
I'm carrying over my comment from ANI]. Please do not accuse those who disagree with you of sock puppetry, or claim a conspiracy among editors to promote an off wiki agenda, or otherwise direct comments at your perceptions of editors. Please discuss content and sourcing based on policy. Please understand that there are more experienced users who understand policies and guidelines better than you do. I would recommend taking a deep breath and heeding CaptainEek's advice. Please understand you are violating a core principle of this project,
WP:CIVIL.
Please understand that if you continue to
make incivil remarks ad/or
cast aspersions, you may be
blocked from editing without further warning. Please
discuss proposed changes based on Wikipedia
policies and guidelines and seek
dispute resolution if needed. Cheers, and happy editing.--
Deep
fried
okra
21:34, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi,
could you, please, explain the reason for this edit:
Special:Diff/939095838...?
TIA. -- CiaPan ( talk) 12:54, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- Deep fried okra 18:52, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
I have posted concerning your edit warring here.-- Deep fried okra 18:59, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. --
Deep
fried
okra
18:58, 10 February 2020 (UTC)Permalink to discussion which was archived too soon.-- Deep fried okra 19:15, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Aek973! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC) |
I saw you used a link to the user Koraskadi's talk page multiple times in Wikipedia:Teahouse#How can I act if he ignores this warning?, and I suppose you mean to ping that user to make them aware of the talk thread in the Teahouse. Alas I'm afraid that won't work – as the Help:Notifications page describes it, the user is notified when their user page is linked, not their talk page. If in doubt, you may consider using the {{ reply to}} or the {{ user link}} template (or any of their redirections, e.g. {{ re}} or {{ u}}), which will make appropriate link for you. -- CiaPan ( talk) 12:48, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Please don't change talk threads headers, as you did in Special:Diff/938441194, without an important reason. This invalidates links like that in the section #Pinging other users above, as the target anchor (the part after the # mark) no longer exists in the destination page. -- CiaPan ( talk) 13:22, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
You recently said, "The user User:Junggukhas joined these actions. In raticle Balhae controversies He provokes a war of edits to remove the positions of three parties in order to seek information in favor of the ideology of his countries - South Korea. Help take action against this. He also did it in the Balhae article - the face is clearly coordinated work that violates the rules of sock-puppet."
Wikipedia does not tolerate harsh language directed at editors who make their edits in good faith. Wikipedia is not social media (where anything goes), it's a legitimate online encyclopedia. In addition, you are not qualified to make an accusation of sock puppetry, as you lack access to the tools for detection and have yet to report your suspicions of sock puppetry against User:Junggukhas. Please cite reliable sources for your edits in the future, and avoid resorting to attacks in the hope of bolstering your edits' chances of sticking.-- Quisqualis ( talk) 00:26, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! ⚓ 06:55, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Aek973! You created a thread called Archival by
Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by
Muninnbot, both
automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
I'm carrying over my comment from ANI]. Please do not accuse those who disagree with you of sock puppetry, or claim a conspiracy among editors to promote an off wiki agenda, or otherwise direct comments at your perceptions of editors. Please discuss content and sourcing based on policy. Please understand that there are more experienced users who understand policies and guidelines better than you do. I would recommend taking a deep breath and heeding CaptainEek's advice. Please understand you are violating a core principle of this project,
WP:CIVIL.
Please understand that if you continue to
make incivil remarks ad/or
cast aspersions, you may be
blocked from editing without further warning. Please
discuss proposed changes based on Wikipedia
policies and guidelines and seek
dispute resolution if needed. Cheers, and happy editing.--
Deep
fried
okra
21:34, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi,
could you, please, explain the reason for this edit:
Special:Diff/939095838...?
TIA. -- CiaPan ( talk) 12:54, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- Deep fried okra 18:52, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
I have posted concerning your edit warring here.-- Deep fried okra 18:59, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. --
Deep
fried
okra
18:58, 10 February 2020 (UTC)Permalink to discussion which was archived too soon.-- Deep fried okra 19:15, 10 February 2020 (UTC)