User talk:Dauzlee

Welcome, Dauzlee!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Dauzlee! I'm Royal Autumn Crest, and I've been assigned as your mentor. Around 10% of new Wikipedia accounts receive a mentor randomly taken from a list of volunteers. It just means I'm here to help with anything you need! We need to have all kinds of people working together to create an online encyclopedia, so I'm glad you're here. Over time, you will figure out what you enjoy doing the most on Wikipedia.

You might have noticed that you have access to a tutorial and suggested edits. It's recommended that you take advantage of this, as it'll make learning how to edit Wikipedia easier.

If you need assistance with anything or have any questions, click on the "Get editing help" button on the bottom right corner of your screen. This will open up a module with links to help pages and a place to ask me questions. You can also ask me questions directly on my talk page, or go here to get help from the wider community.

Again, welcome to Wikipedia!Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 03:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

K Dauzlee (talk) 04:33, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Ilyushin Il-76

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ilyushin Il-76, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (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, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief 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.

TylerBurden (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May I please also note that, according to WP:RUSUKR new users may not edit articles related to Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Replacing Kiev with Kyiv is certainly such edit. Ymblanter (talk) 22:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I did not change Kyiv to Kiev in article related to modern times, I only changed such article if it was historical (for example related to Kievan Rus) for consistency (people already know Kiev is Kyiv so adding "(Kyiv)" beside Kiev is sometime unnecessary) Dauzlee (talk) 01:27, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The English Wikipedia consensus is that we use Kyiv after 1991. For historical articles (certainly for everything before 1917) Kiev must be used. Ymblanter (talk) 18:20, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries like this combined with a lot of strange unexplained edits changing referenced content from "according to" to "claimed", which apparently according to this other opinionated edit summary you think is less credible, regardless of what wording the actual reference uses, seems like some rather WP:TENDENTIOUS signs for editing this topic. TylerBurden (talk) 20:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence that Russia actually use human wave tactics, most of them were rather squad sized assault or armored attacks, which is while attritive, doesn't fit the very definition that was clearly stated on the article itself. Wikipedia editor love to consume any media reports as if they were 100% truthful. I add "claimed" and any words that doubted the media reports especially for example if it came from Ukraine which is as propagandistic as the Russian. Some source cited doesn't have strong evidence such as photo or video of such things happen so usage of "claimed" or "allegedly" should be allowed. You see a lot of western mainstream media that Wikipedia consider "reliable" love to put sensationalist and baseless claims for example Russia ran out of missile (or anything) as early as March 2022, until it was proven false later (this report from wikipedia considered reliable Reuter from march 2022 https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-running-out-precision-munitions-ukraine-war-pentagon-official-2022-03-25/ for example). So, like a lot of Wikipedia editor used the word "claimed" or "allegedly" when citing Russian report, I used it for article when some dubious Ukrainian claims without hard evidence. Dauzlee (talk) 04:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is how Wikipedia works though, the content is dictated by WP:RS, not by what Wikipedia editors deem "hard evidence". Mainstream media generally considered reliable by Wikipedia can definetely be wrong, it's still far better than relying on whatever Wikipedia editors consider "hard evidence", especially when millions of people are fooled by things such as deepfakes every day. The issue is that you are twisting wording to make things seem less credible than how the references actually put it, and given that your edits always seem to be slanted against Ukraine in some way, your editing appears WP:TENDENTIOUS. TylerBurden (talk) 13:31, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attention

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. PAWPERSO (talk) 18:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wow so scarry, a recently created account Dauzlee (talk) 18:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Russo-Ukrainian War. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 00:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please note -- A community discussion at the administrators' noticeboard/incidents has placed all pages with content related to the Russo-Ukrainian War, broadly construed, under indefinite general sanctions, effective 06:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC). Only extended-confirmed editors may make edits related to the topic area. The restriction applies to all edits and pages related to the topic area, broadly construed. Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace to post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive, but may not make edits to the articles themselves. Non-extended-confirmed editors may not make edits to internal project discussions related to the topic area, even within the "Talk:" namespace. Internal project discussions include, but are not limited to, Articles for deletion nominations, WikiProjects, requests for comment, requested moves, and noticeboard discussions. As a reminder, you are a non-extended-confirmed editor and are not allowed to make edits relating to the M2 Bradley's usage in the Russo-Ukrainian war; nor are you allowed to contribute to internal project discussions relating to the topic area, which would include discussions about the reliability of sources. If you continue to violate the general sanctions, you may be blocked from editing without further warning.⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 00:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wits of the Brats moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Wits of the Brats. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:55, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Wits of the Brats for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wits of the Brats 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/Wits of the Brats 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.

I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]