User talk:Bolgarhistory

July 2022

I am not blocking your account only because you have earlier contributions which seem to be fine. If you continue edit-warring, I will block it immediately. Ymblanter (talk) 15:12, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I think to block me firstly yon have to learn situation. My opponent is promoting controversial edits. --Bolgarhistory (talk) 23:07, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And please explain me why you havn't warned my opponent? Maybe has he special permissions to do war of edits? --Bolgarhistory (talk) 23:10, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 22:11, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:42, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The full reasoning for the block, is given here. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:48, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rosguill, I'm suprised, that you haven't blocked a participant who has began the edit-warring. Why don't you use the rule about consensus? --Bolgarhistory (talk) 19:52, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just the edit warring that led to this block, it's the edit warring, plus the apparent collusion with Ilnur efende, plus the fact that across nearly a decade of editing Wikipedia the entirety of your contributions reflect a consistent WP:BATTLEGROUND approach to Tatar topics that is incompatible with working towards a consensus in a constructive fashion. A successful unblock request will address these concerns and explain how you intend to edit constructively moving forward. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:00, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rosguill, besides I'm suprised that you think that me and Ilnur efende are one participant. Do you understand that you are very wrong? Please, look at my appeal. --Bolgarhistory (talk) 20:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you are engaged in meatpuppetry, and beyond that, that your general approach to editing on English Wikipedia has been disruptive. Another admin will review your unblock request. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:07, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong because I just wanted to save consensus versions of articles. And I can make useful contributions. --Bolgarhistory (talk) 20:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rosguill are you really not interested that my opponent deletes Tatar latin alphabet without strong reasons? I'm sure trying to stop this is not forbidden. --Bolgarhistory (talk) 20:23, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My account is not a sockpuppet

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).

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

Request reason:

An administrator has blocked me and Ilnur efende. But we are just from common group in the Tatarstan.Bolgarhistory (talk) 20:02, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 21:03, 21 February 2023 (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.

Bolgarhistory (talk) 20:02, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear administrators. Rosguill hasn't applied sanctions to my opponent. But he did edit-warring too: [1]. --Bolgarhistory (talk) 20:16, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tu quoque. — Trey Maturin™ 20:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Trey Maturin, he has began edit-warring. You can look at any article with conflicts: for example. And it has been started in 2022. --Bolgarhistory (talk) 20:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jpgordon! Please, explain me why my blocking is indefinite? I'm not a battleground attituder. The administrator Rosguill has specified it as a main reason to block me. I can prove that I'm not Ilnur efende. Our contributions are different. And you can check our IP addresses.--Bolgarhistory (talk) 21:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And despite the fact that I have been on the English Wikipedia for 10 years, I'm still a beginner here. I learned English recently. And I can make useful contributions. --Bolgarhistory (talk) 21:18, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]