User talk:Bawix

December 2022

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Lika cap, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Layah50♪ ( 話して～! ) 01:13, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It basically just is Croat. Bawix (talk) 18:15, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to White Croatia. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Layah50♪ ( 話して～! ) 01:14, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Josip Runjanin, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Radav2 (talk) 21:44, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Josip Runjanin. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Radav2 (talk) 21:45, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

Hello, I'm Vacant0. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Aleksandar Vučić have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Vacant0 (talk) 18:07, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kosovo. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
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. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly will. I've thought that this was well "partially" amusing to others, however it doesn't seem to be. Bawix (talk) 19:35, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:10, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Daniel Case (talk) 18:51, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

censoring edits

Please stop. If you continue to censor or remove encyclopedic content based on the fact that it is offensive to some readers, you may be blocked from editing. Wikipedia is not censored, and attempts to censor encyclopedic content will be regarded as vandalism. Joy (talk) 18:57, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a WP:NOTHERE case

@Daniel Case: and @ToBeFree: thanks for the warnings to this editor. However, I wonder if that is just a waste of time. I do not like not assuming good faith on new editors, but this one has many warnings already. They have made 35 edits, but I can't find a single one among them to have improved Wikipedia. Ktrimi991 (talk) 19:33, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ROPE. Daniel Case (talk) 19:33, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK. This is a good opportunity for the editor to reflect and improve. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:07, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Ivan Gundulić. The edit you made seems to have been a straight up search and replace of "Serb" with "Croat", and it rendered the text completely meaningless because it changed e.g. "Greater Serbian" to "Greater Croatian". This your final warning. Joy (talk) 13:51, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for using Wikipedia as a political battleground.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:56, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]