User talk:Пинча

Welcome!

Hi Пинча! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! AntiDionysius (talk) 13:45, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Your recent editing history at Arkady Babchenko shows that you are currently 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. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 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; read about 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 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Theroadislong (talk) 13:52, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 14:06, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to assume bad faith when dealing with other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:Help desk, you may be blocked from editing. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. AntiDionysius (talk) 14:17, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors.--VViking_TalkEdits 14:19, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So how a consensus[1] information from an academic source could be added? I cannot do it because you will ban me, User:AntiDionysius cannot do it, because he is very sick, he is practically dying! Everyone else is threatened with ban. Пинча (talk) 01:15, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

You have repeatedly made false accusations of vandalism. On Wikipedia, vandalism is editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia. Other editors explained to you that the dispute is not vandalism but you persisted with the personal attacks. Cullen328 (talk) 16:43, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Improving an article by adding important information is creating a free encyclopedia. Пинча (talk) 16:48, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removing important information and sources is not dispute. Пинча (talk) 22:40, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Arkady Babchenko. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

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. AntiDionysius (talk) 16:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Arkady Babchenko. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. - - AntiDionysius (talk) 00:55, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was not "attacking" I asked the editor politely to add an important consensus information from a reliable academic source to the article[2]. If the editor cannot do this it means he is sick, or he is not an editor... Пинча (talk) 01:06, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the user has now been blocked, removing the contested edit

[3]

This is how it works: remove information without any reason and understanding, accuse in edit war, block, remove all the information as "contested edit" because "user has now been blocked". This has nothing in common with creating a free encyclopedia. It is bullying of people who want to create a free encyclopedia. I cannot assume good intentions in obvious vandalism, sorry. Пинча (talk) 22:51, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see this through either of two lenses:

You edit-warred. You got called on it. You continued. You got blocked. You were advised that edit-warring would not get your edit implemented, and that's exactly what happened.
You assumed bad faith, and accused others of vandalism contrary to its definition. You got called on it. You did it again and again. You got blocked. And now you are doing that #2 again even after getting blocked.

Your block is on the verge of becoming indefinite and losing talk-page access as well. Stop going down this path, and you will be able to resume editing in accord with our site standards in a half a day or so. DMacks (talk) 20:31, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all I assume my own good intensions, and you have also to assume my good intensions. To restore important information is not edit war. Edit war is to remove it. It is a free encyclopedia, not your own encyclopedia. Пинча (talk) 01:58, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your assertion of what is and isn't edit warring is simply incorrect. AntiDionysius (talk) 07:13, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia works by collegiate, consensus, combative editing is likely to lead to further blocks. Theroadislong (talk) 07:00, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

straight back to edit warring after a block

It doesn't bode well for your future here that you have re-added content against consensus after your recent block. Theroadislong (talk) 15:19, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a free encyclopedia, not your own encyclopedia. I have added an important information from a reliable source (a book)[4]. It seems you view creating a free encyclopedia as an edit war. So what are you warring for? Пинча (talk) 15:54, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Пинча, we all get reverted, you should get used to it. Even editors who have been active here for a decade get reverted. It's a collaborative editing project, it happens. If you insist on your edit, you don't attack other editors, you go to the article talk page and start a discussion to get consensus for your change. That's how disputes are handled here if you don't want to be blocked again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:10, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am being accusing in edit warring and being threatened with ban despite I didn't reverted the contested content: I have found an academic source, and it is not my fault that the academic source says exactly what I am saying![5] It just means that I am right, but those who said that it was trivia were wrong. Пинча (talk) 08:51, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:24, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 13:42, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]