User talk:Antonioptg

Dear Antonioptg, why this diff [1], moreover without any explanation? are you planning to rewrite the whole paragraph (I saw you doing so both here and on the Italian wiki corresponding article) or what? Thanks in advance, regards

LNCSRG (talk) 17:34, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, now I see it has been moved together with the other information that La Repubblica" allegedly derived from Admiral Piroli report. OK.
LNCSRG (talk) 18:09, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your POV reverts on 2012 Italian shooting in the Laccadive Sea

@User talk:Antonioptg: I have responded to your repeated edits of the 2012 Italian Navy Marines shooting incident in the Laccadive Sea on both the EDIT and TALK page of the article giving detailed reasons why your POV deletions/inclusion are deemed unfit. If you have any suggestions to improve this article or wish to discuss something regarding this article, then please do it on the Talk:2012 Italian shooting in the Laccadive Sea.

In view of your repeated reverts/deletions of contributions on Wikipedia, I have placed a EDIT WARNING on your talk page and will be obliged to escalate the matter if you continue to cause disruption to the article.

Edit war warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2012 Italian Navy Marines shooting incident in the Laccadive Sea. 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, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use Talk:2012 Italian Navy Marines shooting incident in the Laccadive Sea 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. Onlyfactsnofiction (talk) 01:30, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding Repeated deletions of sourced content. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Massive re-work of content to suit the Italian narrative on 2012 Italian Navy Marines shooting incident in the Laccadive Sea.The discussion is about the topic 2012 Italian Navy Marines shooting incident in the Laccadive Sea. Thank you. —Onlyfactsnofiction (talk) 00:35, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Russo-Georgian War

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Russo-Georgian War. If you continue triggering the edit filter, you may be blocked from editing.

Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. --UA Victory (talk) 14:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --UA Victory (talk) 16:01, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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:

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; 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. --UA Victory (talk) 16:09, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Russo-Georgian War. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 20:25, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Antonioptg (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I didn't violate the three-revert rule. I did six edits on Russo-Georgian war article, of which only two are revert edits as you can see on the revision history page Antonioptg (talk) 21:48, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It's easy to see from the history page that you were edit warring. It doesn't matter if all of the reverts weren't exactly the same. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

3RR at at Malaysian Flight 17

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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:

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; 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.

I suggest you self-revert your last revert.Volunteer Marek (talk) 20:35, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

December 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 22:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Antonioptg, please read my warning at the AN3 report you filed.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:02, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Eastern Europe, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Stickee (talk) 09:14, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is at DRN:Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Guy Macon (talk) 14:18, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]