User talk:Cristina neagu

Welcome!

Hello, Cristina neagu, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Simona Halep. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! L3X1 Happy2018! (distænt write) 13:27, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thank you

Dellux mkd (talk) 19:15, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cristina neagu. 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 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cristina neagu. 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]

Whitespace

You just add useless whitespaces, not sure how and why. Maybe visual edit is the reason. Kante4 (talk) 16:04, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No it's useless and does things like that. Kante4 (talk) 16:17, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

There is an arbitration enforcement request concerning your edits, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Cristina neagu. Tgeorgescu (talk) 21:18, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

You are topic-banned (WP:TBAN) from Romania and Romanians for six months.

You have been sanctioned for the reasons provided in response to this arbitration enforcement request.

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Sandstein 12:26, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Couple procedural questions on the scope of the TBAN Sandstein. 1) Broadly construed? or specifically just Romania and Romanians? 2) Would this TBAN include Dacia and, by extension, Dacians? Mr rnddude (talk) 12:34, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember editing Dacia or Dacians. Moreover I didn't edit on Romanians also. Just on Romania there were the problems. I will appeal this TBAN, maybe I will get a less harsh punishment (I had 0 reports so far, I was not problematic). Christina (talk) 12:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr rnddude: I do not discuss sanctions with people other than the sanctioned users themselves. Sandstein 12:53, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sandstein, I'm not going to be patient with that response. You can address the answer to Cristina neagu, or failing that I can file at AN under WP:ADMINACCT per editors are free to question or to criticize administrator actions <- that means me, and anyone else. Yes, I'm serious with the threat (correction, I'd have to go by AN first). Now which would you prefer? I've asked you a simple question on scope because your TBAN is not clear. It's a hangman's noose. Mr rnddude (talk) 13:03, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are certainly free to criticize admins, but there is a policy at WP:AC/DS#Appeals by sanctioned editors stating that only the sanctioned editors themselves may appeal a sanction, not others on their behalf. This is why I do not enter into discussions with others about the merits of sanctions I have placed. Nonetheless, to answer your question, my topic ban has the scope described at WP:TBAN. Sandstein 13:07, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sandstein, I'm not appealing the TBAN, so I do not believe that applies. I only asked you to be clear about whether or not it is broadly construed. All I needed was a response of yes, broadly construed. I don't like using AN/ARBCOM as leverage, but I also don't take kindly to having a concern hand-waived away. Thank you for your response. Cristina, whether or not you appeal is up to you, but I will say that the appeals process is playing with fire. Mr rnddude (talk) 13:19, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Tgeorgescu (talk) 16:00, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:00, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:EHF Player of the Year Men

Template:EHF Player of the Year Men has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DannyS712 (talk) 05:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:EHF Player of the Year Women

Template:EHF Player of the Year Women has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DannyS712 (talk) 05:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Tgeorgescu (talk) 09:44, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction

The following sanction now applies to you:

block for 2 weeks

You have been sanctioned for the violation of topic ban on articles related to Romania

This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.

You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Ymblanter (talk) 10:12, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ymblanter: @Sandstein: Guys, please take a look at Tgeorgescu, I need your help! He is using socks in order to report and manipulate against me, in the purest Russian style. First, I got reported by Tgeorgescu after Moxy removed a gallery on Romania. He blamed my words, not something I did. Sandstein, please remember when Mr rnddude asked you about my tban? HE WAS VERY INTERESTED TO FIND OUT IF IT IS BROADLY CONSTRUCTED OR NOT. He is very sneak this Tgeorgescu and his clones, first Mr rnddude supports me with comments against a TBAN and then he asks administrator Sandstein about my TBAN. Moxy and Mr rnddude are clearly the socks of Tgeorgescu, you have my word. 5 minutes after Tgeorgescu posted, Mr rnddude came to announce Moxy via message. IT WAS HIS 1ST MESSAGE OF THE DAY. This guy really has mental problems. I can reply only here, I can't defend myself. Please help me and don't treat the matter superficially! Just check if Tgeorgescu is connected to them, because you always attack the users but you are not also defending them against the reporters who could be bogus. Secondly now, Tgeorgescu really waited for my mistake, last night Moxy intentionally removed my previously added work because to get reported by main user Tgeorgescu. Moxy is just his sock. Tgeorgescu's first edit was also against like. Like of Mr rnddude. And Mr rnddude logged in right after Tgeorgescu, in 5 minutes. I found very strange these similarities, and help me please to make justice. I am blocked even to appeal or report. Christina (talk) 10:29, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you continue casting aspersions your block is likely going to be complemented by a longer duration civility block. It is ridiculuous to claim that Moxy (92k edits in Wikipedia) is somebody;'s sock.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:32, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ymblanter: Why don't you at least check my scenario? Sometimes ridiculous scenarios are real. I believe two guys actually work together, and there are a lot of clones on Romania. They do this since years. I can name another 2 socks. Christina (talk) 10:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

When your block expires (if ever), you can go to WP:SPI and file a case.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I would not suggest she do that - because any case would be summarily declined for being absolutely without a shred of evidence. Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:25, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cristina neagu, because you misuse your talk page to make personal attacks ("This guy really has mental problems"), I've removed your talk page access. Sandstein 11:20, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly beat me to the talk page revocation. But let me add the comments I had for her anyhow: Your attacks on Tgeorgescu, Mr rnddude and Moxy are very inappropriate, and This guy really has mental problems. is quite the personal attack. I would suggest you spend the next two weeks reflecting on your comments towards them, and hopefully have an apology for Tgeorgescu especially. In any case, further personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations of socking when/if the block expires will likely result in a lengthy or indefinite block. Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:25, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moxy and Mr rnddude are clearly the socks of Tgeorgescu, you have my word <- That's lovely. I really appreciate you casting aspersions against me. I have not edited under any other account. Period. He was very interested to find out if it is broadly construed or not <- Yes, and you had every opportunity to ask why I cared, but instead you've opted to try clairvoyancy instead. Well, clairvoyant, if you'd bothered to ask I'd have said: "I figured if the TBAN was not so broadly construed as to encompass Dacian topics, then you could perhaps use your self-declared interest in history to edit constructively in that topic area. This would bolster, drastically, your chances for a successful appeal." I'll ignore the rest of your attacks on myself, except to say that I didn't receive your pings. I guess blocked editors can't use the notification system? In any case, this page is on my watchlist – because of this discussion – but I was downstairs brewing a krieglerglasse (I don't know what it's called in English, but in Serbo-Croatian we call it a krigla shortened from the German) of tea hence my lateness in responding. Hi there, I see you've mentioned me about half a dozen times.
You can choose to take onboard the following as my advice or dismiss it as the ravings of a delusional sockpuppet out to get you. Up to you. Your block will expire in two weeks. Before the block expires take every article relating to the TBAN topic off your watchlist and forget that they exist. Take the next two weeks to a) do something else and b) work out what else you can edit here: handball, ancient history (e.g. Ancient Rome), or whatever else. Stop accusing everyone that doesn't agree with you of being sockpuppets, lunatics, Spetnaz operative forces, or whatever else. If you don't change course now, you won't be editing for much longer. That is all. Mr rnddude (talk) 11:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Wow. How absolutely precious. Maybe they are right and agree that your edits are problematical. Disagreeing with you is by no means evidence of socking. Please see my comments and those of others at ANI. Please be advised-- an uninvolved admin can extend your block if problems persist. Please do consider your behavior toward others carefully when the current block expires. DlohCierekim (talk) 18:48, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cristina neagu. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, 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. Bbb23 (talk) 16:25, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because this is a new block, I am permitting you access to this page again. However, if you resume your abusive behavior, I will revoke it.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:29, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Érd Aréna

Hello, Cristina neagu. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Érd Aréna".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Dolotta (talk) 05:31, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:2018–19 Golden League

Hello, Cristina neagu. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "2018–19 Golden League".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Lapablo (talk) 20:41, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/D. Delavale, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Tgeorgescu (talk) 18:55, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Veronika Dvořáková for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Veronika Dvořáková is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veronika Dvořáková until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

CuteDolphin712 (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]