User talk:Avatar9n

Welcome

Hello, Avatar9n, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question. -Fnlayson (talk) 20:18, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing by user Gunnai?

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Disruptive editing by user Gunnai?". Thank you.

February 2012

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without verifying permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted, as you did at File:MP7A1 suppressor and red dot.jpg. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. When you recently edited 5.6×52mmR, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mm and Gr (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) 09:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List

Parade Magazine is a reliable source. Its wikipedia page says its the most widely read magazine in the U.S., with a circulation of 32.2 million and a readership of nearly 70 million. --58.165.38.201 (talk) 06:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Last Change

The last change you have made in List of Modern Dictators should be discussed in talk page, because there are number of editors now, who are only editing it back to the page which they preferred. Thanks Clarificationgiven (talk) 14:15, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use of warning templates

This is an inappropriate use of warning templates, as the edits in question did not constitute vandalism. I suggest you read WP:NOT VANDALISM before issuing any further warnings. Cheers! Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:52, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of modern dictators

Avatar, your recent reversion of my removal of Lee Kuan Yew's entry on the List of modern dictators has been reverted. Please do not do it again as this currently stands in violation of our biographies of living persons' policy. Edits perceived to be defamatory will be reverted at sight. Furthermore, please leave edit summaries while making changes to article pages. Thanks. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 02:03, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me seriously, why Chinese Communist leader Deng Xiaoping and Jiang Zemin, Soviet communist leaders Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev, Cuban President Raul Castro, Argentina military junta leader Jorge Rafael Videla, Roberto Eduardo Viola, Leopoldo Galtieri, Reynaldo Bignone, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat are not dictators???????Marxistfounder (talk) 18:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because people don't be dictators because of the fact you called them dictators. Vladimir Lenin, Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev were obviously not dictators. Stalin was, and i didn't revert it. Go and find another stuff to play. - Avatar⁸⁹⁶ 13:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Argentina military junta leader Jorge Rafael Videla, Roberto Eduardo Viola, Leopoldo Galtieri, Reynaldo Bignone, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat are not dictators????????????????Marxistfounder (talk) 04:55, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead, add their names and show no mercy. - Avatar⁸⁹⁶ 10:49, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome from STiki!

Hello, Avatar9n, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Information about STiki, including:
- Using STiki and its hotkeys
- Comparison to other tools
Information about vandalism on Wikipedia

Here are some pages which are a little more fun:

The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!

We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (talk) 17:28, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't you a vandal yourself?

[constructional contributions], huh? And that's not the first time --≈≈≈≈ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.191.206.10 (talk) 18:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to add socialism beside juche. - Avatar⁸⁹⁶ 20:53, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Heckler & Koch MP7. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Image size in the infobox of weapons related articles should be 300 px. Thomas.W (talk) 12:18, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Intermediate Cartrige

Facts are dependent upon figures and statistics, not popular opinion. Argumentem ad Populatum is NOT a valid debate tactic.Staygyro (talk) 17:42, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Enough energy to be categorized as intermediate cartridge by who or what? and by what standards? Popular arguement is NOT a valid debate tactic. The assertion simply isn't true. Look at the page on Taylor KO Factor. Have you done TKO calculations for these munitions? and compared them to GENUINE intermediate munitions?Staygyro (talk) 12:33, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For one, There are several ways of measuring stopping power, such as momentum and KE, but these do not consider the importance of bore diameter, which is very important in stopping power, so that makes the TKO the best formula there is for measuring stopping power. Other formulae, Thorniley Factor and the Hatcher Factor, all of which factors in the bore, the velocity and the mass of the bullet, all lead to similar results with regards to the topic discussed, i.e. the fact that the 5.56x45mm, 5.45x39mm and the 5.8x42mm have similar values to each other, but markedly different to REAL immediate rounds like the 7.62x39mm, the 6.8mm SPC, the 7.92 Kurz, the .280 British and the Japanese 6.5mm Arisaka.
For two, where is the source or figures to support the "popular assertion"? Staygyro (talk) 15:38, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 3 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Dictatorship page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

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) 00:24, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Avatar9n. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

Please do not add or change content, as you did at T-72, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. The Globalsecurity source does not say what your edit says, and the Russian source has nothing to do with this, and could possibly even be seen as a fake source... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 15:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at T-72 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 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. 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. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 15:59, 9 December 2016 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Avatar9n reported by User:Thomas.W (Result: ). Thank you. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 16:09, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at T-72

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. 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 request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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.

The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 05:02, 11 December 2016 (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).

Avatar9n (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The sourced information was insistently removed and all i did was to restore it. This should be considered an exception (maybe under Wikipedia:Ignore all rules?) Avatar ⁹ⁿ 15:51, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Straight-forward edit-war. I can see no evidence, nor have you presented any, that you attempted to build a consensus via discussion. Yamla (talk) 15:58, 11 December 2016 (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.

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Avatar9n (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #19217 was submitted on Sep 12, 2017 16:08:07. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 16:08, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Avatar9n. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Avatar9n. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Avatar9n. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Custom signature fix needed

Hi there! You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. A change to Wikipedia's software has made your current custom signature incompatible with the software.

The problem: Your signature contains a syntax error, specifically formatting tags that are in the wrong order.

The solutions: You can reset your signature to the default, or you can fix your signature.

Solution 1: Reset your signature to the default:

Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
Remove anything in the Signature: text box.
Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page. (The red "Restore all default settings" button will reset all of your preference settings, not just the signature.)

Solution 2: Fix your custom signature:

Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
Change the signature as shown below, or make other edits to make the signature appear how you want it to appear.
Click Save to update to your newly fixed signature.

Current signature:
[[User:Avatar9n|Avatar]][[User talk:Avatar9n|9n]]

Fixed signature:
[[User:Avatar9n|Avatar]][[User talk:Avatar9n|9n]]

More information is available at Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing how everyone sees your signature. If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures or respond here. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]