User talk:Escargoten

File permission problem with File:Flag of Lostisland.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Flag of Lostisland.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:02, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Предупреждение

Не смейте обвинять меня в вандализме и лгать в описании правки, иначе я обращусь к админам. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 12:13, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Не беспокойтесь, я сам обращусь к ним. --Escargoten (talk) 14:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Очень хорошо раз такое существо как ты понимает только язык санкций будем говорить на ЗКА. Vyacheslav84 (talk) 15:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. 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 appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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. JodyB_talk 15:53, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

Hello, I'm ToonLucas22. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Liberland with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. TL22 (talk) 20:52, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Try and refrain from editing against consensus, which you did on Liberland. 'Explaining' does not give you a free ball. The Jolly Bard (talk) 21:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Says the guy who just violated the 3RR. --Escargoten (talk) 21:28, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I share that opinion about those 2 other micronations, be free to rejoin the discussion! --Lyam Desmet (talk) 16:02, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Hello, I'm Meters. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Matthew and Hunter Islands that didn't seem very civil,. I suggest that you remove it. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Meters (talk) 00:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your recent edit to List of micronations appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. Meters (talk) 00:28, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Matthew and Hunter Islands. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been 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 notice boards.
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. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. You added it, it was removed, and it is under discussion on the talk page. Don't restore it unless there is consensus on the talk page that it should go in the article. Meters (talk) 00:07, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:Matthew and Hunter Islands. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Meters (talk) 07:09, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Calling an editor certifiably incompetent is a personal attack. Remove it or I will. Meters (talk) 07:12, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how is this an attack, when User:Ckatz said that on that very talk page that those who disagree with him have "low-volume accounts" nobody seems to have given a damn. To compare micronations with SCA Kingdoms is a sign of user's incompetence on the matter, and I'm not going to censor myself after having spent last 10 years researching micronations and micronationalism. --Escargoten (talk) 15:24, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My statement was not a personal attack; it was an observation that (IIRC) the account in question did not have many edits and or seemed to exist for one specific purpose. This is a common problem on Wikipedia. As for your actions in recent days, it is important to understand that you are not entitled to repeatedly add material to the article when its veracity or notability has been called into question. Instead, the issue should be resolved on the talk page. If the outcome is not to your satisfaction, you can always appeal for more input but you cannot ignore the consensus and keep restoring your preferred text. Ckatz^chat _spy 22:43, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is a large difference between suggesting that someone lacks competence in an area, and stating that they are "certifiably incompetent". Calling an editor mentally incompetent is a personal attack. I've redacted the statement. Don't restore it. Meters (talk) 08:02, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is exactly what I said, that he lacks competence in the field of micronations – I never suggested that he’s mentally incompetent. Sorry if this wasn’t clear enough, English is not my first language.--Escargoten (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase means exactly what I said it does, and I suspect that given your obvious fluency in English you know that very well, even if English is not your first language. If you want to claim that your English is not good enough to understand the significance of that idiomatic phrase then you should pay attention when someone tells you you have made a personal attack and asks you to remove it. Meters (talk) 17:33, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I looked up my comments again, first I said "this already points to your lack of competence of the matter", and only then "same applies, comparing micronations to SCA demonstrates [personal attack redacted]. I don't see how this is a personal attack, sorry — it is obvious enough I meant incompetence in the field of micronations and not mental incompetence.--Escargoten (talk) 21:31, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Escargoten. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. It does not matter if you don't think this is a personal attack. You have already said that English is not your first language. I've explained what the phrase means and why it is a personal attack. Repeating it is another personal attack, so I've redacted it again and I'm giving you another warning. Do not use that phrase again to refer to an editor. For that matter, I would suggest that even stating that someone lacks competence in a subject is something you would be well advised to avoid saying. Meters (talk) 23:42, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah block me for making a quote, sure.--Escargoten (talk) 01:48, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, quoting yourself making a personal attack is a personal attack. Don't do it. Meters (talk) 02:03, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to see a personal attack, look at how on 12 February 2015 Vyacheslav84 called me a "creature" on this very talkpage, albeit in Russian; I wonder why nobody censored him? Quoting is not an attack, and the quote wasn't an attack in the first place.Escargoten (talk) 07:39, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Matthew Island and Hunter Island. 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.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

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; 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.
This has already been discussed on the talk page, and consensus was not to include it. Either discuss this on the talk page again or leave it alone. Meters (talk) 19:52, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The one edit-warring here is yourself. The consensus you're talking about was never reached, and you conveniently ignore how a new source has been added. Escargoten (talk) 21:30, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Matthew Island and Hunter Island. You added something that you have repeatedly tried to add and that has been repeatedly removed. I have challenged it again. Per WP:BRD take it to talk or leave it out. Meters (talk) 21:31, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong, I added a new reference and you know it. You yourself are disrupting Wikipedia purposely ignoring it. Escargoten (talk) 21:38, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please examine WP:SPA to see why it is best to get experience in a broad range of topics. Johnuniq (talk) 21:56, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As User:Meters once said, comment on the edits - not the editor. If I consider myself a specialist in micronations, why should I contribute on other subjects, that I'm perhaps less familiar with? Escargoten (talk) 22:15, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because greater participation in the community leads to a broader understanding of standard procedures. That would show that the fuss about micronations is completely normal boosterism of WP:UNDUE material that happens every day in hundreds of unrelated topics. Johnuniq (talk) 23:03, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Grand Duchy of Flandrensis

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Grand Duchy of Flandrensis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://micronations.wiki/wiki/Grand_Duchy_of_Flandrensis. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. M.Ashraf333 (talk) 03:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]