User talk:Gamerprof

Welcome!

Hello, Gamerprof, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits has not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome. Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:29, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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.

In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. 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. Calidum T|C 02:36, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Yevgeny Petrov (writer), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Denisarona (talk) 07:03, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Dino Zoff, you may be blocked from editing. Denniss (talk) 17:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Kievan Rus'. Iryna Harpy (talk) 06:04, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Thank you" for your "cooperation" in Justo Villar (most reliable sources say it's 1,80 m, his OFFICIAL club profile also says the same), I have already reported this. --84.90.219.128 (talk) 22:21, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

General problems with your contributions

I've noticed that you've made many changes to various genres of articles across Wikipedia without providing an edit summary, and without providing an form of reliable source to substantiate your changes.

If you are changing content and don't know how to add references, at least WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT. I am assuming good faith on your behalf, but have had to revert your changes to a number of articles because they don't match up with sourced references. Please learn how to cite your references. If you are in doubt over conflicting information in a number of sources, start a new section on the article's WP:TALK page and explain what you think the problem is, then wait for a response from other editors involved in the development and/or maintenance of the article.

Continuing to make unsourced changes is considered disruptive editing (even vandalism). Thank you for your attention. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:42, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Viktor Bannikov, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:38, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Yopie (talk) 17:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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. Yopie (talk) 20:10, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bashkirs

As an administrator, I've been asked to look into the recent developments around the Bashkirs article. This is to let you know that the Joshua Project source you are adding does not meet the criteria for reliable sources and is thus not acceptable. Please do not reinstate your edit without providing an alternative, reliable source. Better yet, take this to the article's talk page, but first I recommend that you review our civility guidelines, because comments such as those you left on Регион102's talk page are completely out of line. You could be blocked for incivility due to those comments alone.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); October 14, 2015; 15:36 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2016

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Potato pancake, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. If you have a reliable source that shows that potato pancakes existed in Belarus before they did anywhere else (a dubious claim, since potatoes are not European in origin), please add it to the article. Otherwise, do not repeat this change. Ibadibam (talk) 00:46, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing of Ryazhenka article. If you continue to make unmotivated edits ignoring the arguments in edit summaries and on its Talk page, you may be blocked from editing. --Off-shell (talk) 22:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

March 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ryazhenka. 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. clpo13_(talk) 00:07, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Eastern Europe, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

—/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for incivility and edit warring. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:19, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you indicate that you're willing to discuss things in a reasonable manner, an admin may unblock you. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:19, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Gamerprof. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]