![]() |
Hi Serdik!! You're invited: learn how to edit Wikipedia in under an hour. I hope to see you there! Ocaasi |
-- 13:11, Monday, July 20, 2015 ( UTC)
Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
![]() |
Thank you for your contribution of creating the Street dogs in Sofia article! ~Euphoria42 21:18, 22 July 2015 (UTC) |
Hello Serdik,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Street dogs in Sofia for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Rswallis10 ( talk) 21:19, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
I saw the articles Street dogs in Moscow, Street dogs in Bucharest and created on e for Sofia, they are the same subject, maybe you should either nominate or not nominate all these.-- Serdik ( talk) 23:11, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
The article
Sofia you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Sofia for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article.
'''tAD''' (
talk)
20:12, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Hallo, Serdik! I want to tell you to use Talk page for discussions and opinions, before to make a changes. What are the problems with some your editions:
Thank you for the invitation, I'm going to join the discussion at the talk page of Sofia as soon as I have leisure time. But I'm quite busy right now. Best-- Serdik ( talk) 08:24, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, again! It's a very interesting adding as whole, but it broke the encyclopedic view of the article, because these are details of another type of content. You are free to create a new article for Sofia's crime, like was made in Crime in London or Crime in the United States. Thank you for your contributions and have a nice day!-- Stolichanin ( talk) 10:05, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Take a look at Bucharest. Your deletion is not an improvement.-- Serdik ( talk) 10:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
It is not a serious reason what was when. I point you out obvious absurds at your image, there is no collage with 3 churches, or 3 mosques, or 3 malls, or 3 stadiums...if we are going to give examples with other articles. Do you really fail to see this? It is obvious from a third-party. I can't create an article Crime in Sofia with so little information, it is as much as for a section. Create such an article if you can. Regards. -- Serdik ( talk) 11:45, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
I hpoe it will be useful!-- Stolichanin ( talk) 12:14, 12 October 2015 (UTC) See WP:NEWSORG, news sources are permitted. the sources are primarily the people, secondly the publishers. The mayor of Sofia says this is the number one problem of the city, do you think she is not a reliable source? You don't provide me shortcuts to any rules, I'd advise you to read WP:RS and figure out what is a reliable source. There is no such a rule for which we have to remove the crime section. It is data from an official source by the Ministry. -- Serdik ( talk) 12:21, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Sofia shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
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.
Please, provide more patience and stop undoing whole bunches of changes instead of issue by issue!!
ZH8000 (
talk)
13:18, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to
User Talk:ZH8000 has been
reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a
warning or blocking template. Please use the
user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our
introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. As already said before, provide a "bit" more patience!! I was writing an answer, while you were already tagging me!!
ZH8000 (
talk)
13:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Sofia. 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.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. samtar ( msg) 13:46, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
I got it, thank you-- Serdik ( talk) 13:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sofia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alexander Nevsky Cathedral. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:32, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
It's not bad as well! But I think your collage is too modern. Maybe some historical building from Roman epoch will be a good addition. Sofia is important center in the Roman Empire and even your username is Serdik :). For example - Saint Sofia Church or the Amphitheatre of Serdica, which is considered as one of the greatest in Roman Empire during the Antiquity or even the fortress of Serdica.-- Stolichanin ( talk) 16:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. Please help with modifying the collage if you have any suggestions. Add whatever you'd like. The article is not mine or your own. Do you have any photos of the amphitheatre, other than those in Commons? No details, outlining a building or a structure can be seen at them, just a few pylons. I have the ability to pick up stupid nicknames, I am personally not a fan of Serdika, the Romans or something similar, but the database do not permit me much choice, so I realised that only strange names are available to pick. :D Regards.-- Serdik ( talk) 00:17, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi! Can you replace this picture of Vitosha with another of the same mountain, because seems too darkness and not very beautiful?-- 85.118.69.17 ( talk) 08:17, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
In what language is this? Scottish dialect I guess? I've never heard it. Sorry, I can't understand you.-- Serdik ( talk) 14:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Welsh! Any problem? Typical Eastern European racist.-- 85.118.69.17 ( talk) 15:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Calm down, take it easy, I don't allege you with adjectives, whatever your request is, post it at Sofia's talk page. I understand that you say the image is dark or darkness, or whatever, but I wonder why. The sky is blue?! Weird statement of yours. I don't understand such an unargumented contradiction. And there are not many uploaded pictures of Vitosha here, if you can find better - upload it. Even if not beautiful, the mountain seems high, none European capital has such a high mountain.-- Serdik ( talk) 16:18, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, nice photos. What I think is that the structure of the amphiteatre of Serdica is unfortunately not well preserved, the pylons and the bricks seem brand new, it is located in some sort of hotel or a building, what is so historical at such an image? The Fort of Serdica, although renovated does not have an image of a complete or preserved semi-structure. The only preserved antique buildings in Sofia in their whole structure are the Saint Sofia and Saint George of Rolanda Church, as far as I remember. Lion's Bridge, along with Eagle's Bridge have been the best bridges in Sofia so far, choose preferably the better photo. Do you think that these images should replace others(which?) or you think to use them as additions? -- Serdik ( talk) 21:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Да не си автора на новата песен за София, че е най хубавият град? Ти си живееш в някакво минало, не гледаш в бъдещето, и да не е София като Лондон, ще стане. За София и Лондон най-вероятно ще има да пишеме за нови престъпления, терористични актове отдавна се плануват, в Лондон се промениха народите, а и в София също. Аз ти казах да си редактираш каквото искаш. Спрямо желанието да се заяждаш, ти си си трола дето ми вика расист и т.н. Ако искаш се заяждяй, ако искаш редактирай, много си пък важен да ме занимаваш кое Уики ще редактираш вместо да се придържаш към прадмета на разговор. Ако не можеш да комуникираш цивилизовано иди и в северно корейското Уики, нали си пътевал извън Бг и знаеш езици. Може и да си живял в Лондон, не казвам че не си, но това че пишеш с такива грешки, заедно с другия трол по-горе, е чиста преструвка, нали? Невъзможно е иначе. Бас държа, че ще гласуваш за Фъндъкова. -- Serdik ( talk) 13:17, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Тука не си прав, нищо освен английски не е толкова правилно тука. Започна да пишеш на български, за да ми отправяш лични нападки от три различни страни, а Стоичков? Реших и аз малко да се понаправя, както ти се понаправяш с английския. Не съм казал, че те поправям или критикувам, даже го одобрявам и ми звучи много яко как се правите на неграмотни(а не сте) по същия начин заедно с другия по-горе. Не че имам против имиграцията към София, почти всички са по-малко или повече части от нея, но "таквиз" със сигурност идва от далечен диалект на софийския, както и другите ти езикови забележки, столичанин. Иначе, тия гласове никой не ги брои или всички гласуваха за един и същи?-- Serdik ( talk) 11:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
SO YOU SAID THAT YOU LEAVE THE ARTICLE, BUT INSTEAD YOU RETURN TOGETHER WITH YOUR ALTERNATIVE ACCOUNT TO PUSH THE IMAGE YOU UPLOADED ?!? I HAVE ANOTHER SUGGESTION - EITHER LEAVE THE ARTICLE OR EDIT WITH A SINGLE ACCOUNT, PLEASE. -- Serdik ( talk) 05:03, 3 November 2015 (UTC) Please use a proper translator. I haven't accused him of anything. He posted his trolling in Bulgarian, not me. -- Serdik ( talk) 13:38, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't have any sourcing requests for this article.--14:48, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to
Sofia, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the
edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been
reverted. Please make use of the
sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you.
As I have already explained to you, offline sources are fine to use on Wikipedia, and per WP:SOURCEACCESS, you must not reject a published source merely because you have to pay to access it. Please do not revert again without a valid reason to reject the source, and preferrably, not at all without prior discussion. As I already mentioned, your insistence that the editor who originally provided the citation send you a printed copy of the book is ridiculous and given your attitude on the talk page, I am very nearly running out of good faith towards you.
LjL ( talk) 19:19, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Have it your way. I don't want t argue whether 4 is 2+2 or 3+1 for such a minor thing. Regards.-- Serdik ( talk) 22:04, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sofia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BSP. 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) 10:05, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
If you're going to openly accuse User:Green skokljo of being a sockpuppet of (I assume) User:Stolichanin, you'd better start a sockpuppet investigation and provide evidence; otherwise, it can be seen as just a personal attack, which should be avoided.
You should all calm down with the Sofia wars, Wikipedia is not a battlefield but Stolichaning, this other editor and you are basically treating it as one.
From what I can see, it's unlikely that the two users are the same editor, given they've actually talked (in Bulgarian) to each other. LjL ( talk) 17:16, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Notice the grammar, the points "angry user" "in talk page", "the mall is not a landmark" and much more. I am 100% certain that Stolichanin is the sockmaster of the IP and the Green skokljo account. How to deal when a user manages three accounts to deceive editors at one article? I'd help reverting these socks.-- Serdik ( talk) 20:26, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I got it, thank you for the instructions. This account is currently blocked which I appreciate. If this or another account continues to deceive when the block expire I will file this, but for now my time does not permit. Regards. -- Serdik ( talk) 21:06, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
...are located at History of Belgrade. Do not add the box to Belgrade. Thank you.-- Zoupan 19:23, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
OK. I think Singidun should be moved to the article you are talking about?-- Serdik ( talk) 19:28, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
What exactly you mean with that "sock-puppetry"? I explained my registration on Sofia's talk page. My IP is 151.237.102.118, but I make a registration with the name: Vargala, like everybody can see. It's not sock-puppetry according to that text Wikipedia:Sock puppetry.-- Vargala ( talk) 13:51, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
What do you have against me, my friend? Maybe I made any mistakes in the past but they were in the past. I support your idea of collage (and I have some new ideas about this). According to what I read on Sofia's talk archieve, you add this template because you want "everyone to be free to edit the puzzle." I see the page history, but I can't understand your principle "my collage or no collage." It's against your old idea above and seems not very nice. Sofia is not your page. Everyone in Wikipedia is free to edit. No censorship, please! Good luck and regards!-- Vargala ( talk) 10:49, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
A word of advice: they say CheckUser is not for fishing, and in general, I think you shouldn't open too many and too broad SPIs on scant evidence. I remember in the last one you opened, you assumed someone was a Sumatro sock after they made just one inconspicuous edit that simply added information about a museum (which seemed fine). Now you opened one with a large number of IPs... why don't you just ask for semi-protection? That is what's usually done when IP hoppers are disrupting a page, not an SPI for them all. LjL ( talk) 14:36, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the
Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.
![]() |
Hi Serdik!! You're invited: learn how to edit Wikipedia in under an hour. I hope to see you there! Ocaasi |
-- 13:11, Monday, July 20, 2015 ( UTC)
Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
![]() |
Thank you for your contribution of creating the Street dogs in Sofia article! ~Euphoria42 21:18, 22 July 2015 (UTC) |
Hello Serdik,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Street dogs in Sofia for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Rswallis10 ( talk) 21:19, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
I saw the articles Street dogs in Moscow, Street dogs in Bucharest and created on e for Sofia, they are the same subject, maybe you should either nominate or not nominate all these.-- Serdik ( talk) 23:11, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
The article
Sofia you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Sofia for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article.
'''tAD''' (
talk)
20:12, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Hallo, Serdik! I want to tell you to use Talk page for discussions and opinions, before to make a changes. What are the problems with some your editions:
Thank you for the invitation, I'm going to join the discussion at the talk page of Sofia as soon as I have leisure time. But I'm quite busy right now. Best-- Serdik ( talk) 08:24, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, again! It's a very interesting adding as whole, but it broke the encyclopedic view of the article, because these are details of another type of content. You are free to create a new article for Sofia's crime, like was made in Crime in London or Crime in the United States. Thank you for your contributions and have a nice day!-- Stolichanin ( talk) 10:05, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello. Take a look at Bucharest. Your deletion is not an improvement.-- Serdik ( talk) 10:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
It is not a serious reason what was when. I point you out obvious absurds at your image, there is no collage with 3 churches, or 3 mosques, or 3 malls, or 3 stadiums...if we are going to give examples with other articles. Do you really fail to see this? It is obvious from a third-party. I can't create an article Crime in Sofia with so little information, it is as much as for a section. Create such an article if you can. Regards. -- Serdik ( talk) 11:45, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
I hpoe it will be useful!-- Stolichanin ( talk) 12:14, 12 October 2015 (UTC) See WP:NEWSORG, news sources are permitted. the sources are primarily the people, secondly the publishers. The mayor of Sofia says this is the number one problem of the city, do you think she is not a reliable source? You don't provide me shortcuts to any rules, I'd advise you to read WP:RS and figure out what is a reliable source. There is no such a rule for which we have to remove the crime section. It is data from an official source by the Ministry. -- Serdik ( talk) 12:21, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Sofia shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
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.
Please, provide more patience and stop undoing whole bunches of changes instead of issue by issue!!
ZH8000 (
talk)
13:18, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to
User Talk:ZH8000 has been
reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a
warning or blocking template. Please use the
user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our
introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. As already said before, provide a "bit" more patience!! I was writing an answer, while you were already tagging me!!
ZH8000 (
talk)
13:20, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Sofia. 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.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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. samtar ( msg) 13:46, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
I got it, thank you-- Serdik ( talk) 13:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sofia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alexander Nevsky Cathedral. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:32, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
It's not bad as well! But I think your collage is too modern. Maybe some historical building from Roman epoch will be a good addition. Sofia is important center in the Roman Empire and even your username is Serdik :). For example - Saint Sofia Church or the Amphitheatre of Serdica, which is considered as one of the greatest in Roman Empire during the Antiquity or even the fortress of Serdica.-- Stolichanin ( talk) 16:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. Please help with modifying the collage if you have any suggestions. Add whatever you'd like. The article is not mine or your own. Do you have any photos of the amphitheatre, other than those in Commons? No details, outlining a building or a structure can be seen at them, just a few pylons. I have the ability to pick up stupid nicknames, I am personally not a fan of Serdika, the Romans or something similar, but the database do not permit me much choice, so I realised that only strange names are available to pick. :D Regards.-- Serdik ( talk) 00:17, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi! Can you replace this picture of Vitosha with another of the same mountain, because seems too darkness and not very beautiful?-- 85.118.69.17 ( talk) 08:17, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
In what language is this? Scottish dialect I guess? I've never heard it. Sorry, I can't understand you.-- Serdik ( talk) 14:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Welsh! Any problem? Typical Eastern European racist.-- 85.118.69.17 ( talk) 15:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Calm down, take it easy, I don't allege you with adjectives, whatever your request is, post it at Sofia's talk page. I understand that you say the image is dark or darkness, or whatever, but I wonder why. The sky is blue?! Weird statement of yours. I don't understand such an unargumented contradiction. And there are not many uploaded pictures of Vitosha here, if you can find better - upload it. Even if not beautiful, the mountain seems high, none European capital has such a high mountain.-- Serdik ( talk) 16:18, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, nice photos. What I think is that the structure of the amphiteatre of Serdica is unfortunately not well preserved, the pylons and the bricks seem brand new, it is located in some sort of hotel or a building, what is so historical at such an image? The Fort of Serdica, although renovated does not have an image of a complete or preserved semi-structure. The only preserved antique buildings in Sofia in their whole structure are the Saint Sofia and Saint George of Rolanda Church, as far as I remember. Lion's Bridge, along with Eagle's Bridge have been the best bridges in Sofia so far, choose preferably the better photo. Do you think that these images should replace others(which?) or you think to use them as additions? -- Serdik ( talk) 21:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Да не си автора на новата песен за София, че е най хубавият град? Ти си живееш в някакво минало, не гледаш в бъдещето, и да не е София като Лондон, ще стане. За София и Лондон най-вероятно ще има да пишеме за нови престъпления, терористични актове отдавна се плануват, в Лондон се промениха народите, а и в София също. Аз ти казах да си редактираш каквото искаш. Спрямо желанието да се заяждаш, ти си си трола дето ми вика расист и т.н. Ако искаш се заяждяй, ако искаш редактирай, много си пък важен да ме занимаваш кое Уики ще редактираш вместо да се придържаш към прадмета на разговор. Ако не можеш да комуникираш цивилизовано иди и в северно корейското Уики, нали си пътевал извън Бг и знаеш езици. Може и да си живял в Лондон, не казвам че не си, но това че пишеш с такива грешки, заедно с другия трол по-горе, е чиста преструвка, нали? Невъзможно е иначе. Бас държа, че ще гласуваш за Фъндъкова. -- Serdik ( talk) 13:17, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Тука не си прав, нищо освен английски не е толкова правилно тука. Започна да пишеш на български, за да ми отправяш лични нападки от три различни страни, а Стоичков? Реших и аз малко да се понаправя, както ти се понаправяш с английския. Не съм казал, че те поправям или критикувам, даже го одобрявам и ми звучи много яко как се правите на неграмотни(а не сте) по същия начин заедно с другия по-горе. Не че имам против имиграцията към София, почти всички са по-малко или повече части от нея, но "таквиз" със сигурност идва от далечен диалект на софийския, както и другите ти езикови забележки, столичанин. Иначе, тия гласове никой не ги брои или всички гласуваха за един и същи?-- Serdik ( talk) 11:10, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
SO YOU SAID THAT YOU LEAVE THE ARTICLE, BUT INSTEAD YOU RETURN TOGETHER WITH YOUR ALTERNATIVE ACCOUNT TO PUSH THE IMAGE YOU UPLOADED ?!? I HAVE ANOTHER SUGGESTION - EITHER LEAVE THE ARTICLE OR EDIT WITH A SINGLE ACCOUNT, PLEASE. -- Serdik ( talk) 05:03, 3 November 2015 (UTC) Please use a proper translator. I haven't accused him of anything. He posted his trolling in Bulgarian, not me. -- Serdik ( talk) 13:38, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't have any sourcing requests for this article.--14:48, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to
Sofia, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the
edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been
reverted. Please make use of the
sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you.
As I have already explained to you, offline sources are fine to use on Wikipedia, and per WP:SOURCEACCESS, you must not reject a published source merely because you have to pay to access it. Please do not revert again without a valid reason to reject the source, and preferrably, not at all without prior discussion. As I already mentioned, your insistence that the editor who originally provided the citation send you a printed copy of the book is ridiculous and given your attitude on the talk page, I am very nearly running out of good faith towards you.
LjL ( talk) 19:19, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Have it your way. I don't want t argue whether 4 is 2+2 or 3+1 for such a minor thing. Regards.-- Serdik ( talk) 22:04, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sofia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BSP. 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) 10:05, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
If you're going to openly accuse User:Green skokljo of being a sockpuppet of (I assume) User:Stolichanin, you'd better start a sockpuppet investigation and provide evidence; otherwise, it can be seen as just a personal attack, which should be avoided.
You should all calm down with the Sofia wars, Wikipedia is not a battlefield but Stolichaning, this other editor and you are basically treating it as one.
From what I can see, it's unlikely that the two users are the same editor, given they've actually talked (in Bulgarian) to each other. LjL ( talk) 17:16, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Notice the grammar, the points "angry user" "in talk page", "the mall is not a landmark" and much more. I am 100% certain that Stolichanin is the sockmaster of the IP and the Green skokljo account. How to deal when a user manages three accounts to deceive editors at one article? I'd help reverting these socks.-- Serdik ( talk) 20:26, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I got it, thank you for the instructions. This account is currently blocked which I appreciate. If this or another account continues to deceive when the block expire I will file this, but for now my time does not permit. Regards. -- Serdik ( talk) 21:06, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
...are located at History of Belgrade. Do not add the box to Belgrade. Thank you.-- Zoupan 19:23, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
OK. I think Singidun should be moved to the article you are talking about?-- Serdik ( talk) 19:28, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
What exactly you mean with that "sock-puppetry"? I explained my registration on Sofia's talk page. My IP is 151.237.102.118, but I make a registration with the name: Vargala, like everybody can see. It's not sock-puppetry according to that text Wikipedia:Sock puppetry.-- Vargala ( talk) 13:51, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
What do you have against me, my friend? Maybe I made any mistakes in the past but they were in the past. I support your idea of collage (and I have some new ideas about this). According to what I read on Sofia's talk archieve, you add this template because you want "everyone to be free to edit the puzzle." I see the page history, but I can't understand your principle "my collage or no collage." It's against your old idea above and seems not very nice. Sofia is not your page. Everyone in Wikipedia is free to edit. No censorship, please! Good luck and regards!-- Vargala ( talk) 10:49, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
A word of advice: they say CheckUser is not for fishing, and in general, I think you shouldn't open too many and too broad SPIs on scant evidence. I remember in the last one you opened, you assumed someone was a Sumatro sock after they made just one inconspicuous edit that simply added information about a museum (which seemed fine). Now you opened one with a large number of IPs... why don't you just ask for semi-protection? That is what's usually done when IP hoppers are disrupting a page, not an SPI for them all. LjL ( talk) 14:36, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the
Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.