User talk:Jjik43

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Killer Chihuahua 13:03, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Karaiskakis Stadium dispute warning

Hello. If you and the other editor do not stop disruptively editing the article and edit warring either of you or both will be blocked. Take to the article's talk page to discuss this content issue citing reliable sources and come to consensus. If you're unable to do so then consider dispute resolution, but you must stop reverting and or editing to re-insert your preferred text. I am not commenting on the factual evidence of who is correct, I am simply warning you that continuing the way you both are will result in sanctions. N.J.A. | talk 13:18, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, likewise in relation to Peace and Friendship Stadium. Pushing a geographical point of view on multiple articles is a concern and will end with sanctions if you are not evidencing on talk pages reasonable attempts to discuss a consensus and making use of reliable sources. N.J.A. | talk 13:22, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edit on my talk page, and the duplicate one you gave admin KillerChihuahua on their page. To be clear I never said you vandalized, I said you are editing disruptively, edit warring and failing to discuss a dispute properly and you will be blocked if you continue to do so.

To assist and to in an attempt to stop the disruption, I require evidence from you using a reliable source to evidence your changes to the geographical location of stadiums in the following articles:

Karaiskakis Stadium,
Peace and Friendship Stadium,
List of music venues,
1991 FIBA Centennial Jubilee Basketball Tournament,
1984–85 FIBA European Champions Cup,
Neo Phaliron Velodrome

If you are unable to do so then your edits will be undone and any attempt by you to revert or reinsert such unsourced edits (without seeking consensus in advance) will result in an indefinite block. N.J.A. | talk 14:12, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Karaiskakis Stadium; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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. Killer Chihuahua 13:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from KillerChihuahua

Hello, Jjik43. You have new messages at KillerChihuahua's talk page.
Message added 14:17, 17 September 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Killer Chihuahua 14:17, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editor you reported may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned. Please note there is a difference between vandalism and unhelpful or misguided edits made in good faith. If the user continues to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report it. You must warn vandals. You must be certain the edits are vandalism. Do not waste administrator's time by reporting IPs with one edit, that you never even warned. Killer Chihuahua 14:54, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed your post on my talk page. If the editor is a sockpuppet, report him at SPI, or find another admin who is familiar with the case. I am not the admin to come to with sock reports; it really is not my area. Killer Chihuahua 15:10, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on the wrong noticeboard —in order to try to get them blocked. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. I'm tired of you using AIV for people you're involved in content disputes with, and suspected sock puppets. Stop it. You know where to report socks, and you know where WP:DR is. You trying to get editors blocked by spamming AIV is a waste of admin's time. Killer Chihuahua 16:11, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To emphasize/agree with what KillerChihuahua is saying, to report socks at AIV, it needs to be obvious to the casual observer what is going on. It is not obvious what is going on. As I just commented on the SPI you created, I have a feeling either you, or your opponent, or both, are long term socks, but I don't understand what is going on, and you and Chalk19 are both saying it's obvious the other is an LTA when it is not at all obvious. Please make all further reports at that SPI, and take the time to explain to people who are not familiar with the situation (or talk to an admin who is). AIV is for quick, easy, obvious reports. This is not one of those. And, if you're not the sock, sorry it's so complicated. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:43, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Forum shopping

Stop making the same complaints to multiple admins on multiple pages. Go discuss your desired edits on the article talk page, civilly and with courtesy and respect, as you've been told now repeatedly, by at least 6 admins. You're wearing out your grace period here. Killer Chihuahua 18:19, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

6 admins? The article talk page have this section [1] but vrahomarinaner and chalk19 are ignoring it--Jjik43 (talk) 18:21, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[2] and [3] and [4] are all shopping around. You made the same argument on AIV, where three admins responded, and on SPI. Stop it. I'm not going to argue how many times you've acted inappropriately - I'm telling you to stop doing it, now. Killer Chihuahua 18:24, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And the article talk page hasn't been edited by you at all. It hasn't been edited since what, 2017? GO POST ON IT. Make a new header, be polite, say exactly what change you think should be made and why. Stop wasting my time, and everyone else's time. Killer Chihuahua 18:26, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not forget I asked the user today to "provide evidence and stop or you will be blocked indefinitely". N.J.A. | talk 18:36, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would support such an action. This editor has exhibited no desire to cease his hostile approach to editing, and although told many, many times to discuss on the talk page and pursue dispute resolution, he has posted on the article talk page zero times, and followed none of the DR steps. Instead, he has harassed every admin he has come into contact with, pasting the same complaints on multiple pages, no matter how many times he's been told he's wasting everyone's time and his complaints are inappropriate and irrelevant. I have absolutely no disagreement with an indef. Killer Chihuahua 18:41, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello 3 not more than 6. I din't begin the edit war before me the article wrote Piraeus, Athens and the vrahomarinaner start the edit war. Yes i did not write at talk page but is location section here which is "closed". @NJA me? Sorry both for my bad english--Jjik43 (talk) 18:47, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No one cares how many. I'm not going to drag out the difs. No one cares who "started it" - literally NO ONE. You're not listening. YOU are not to edit war. YOU are to discuss changes you want to make on the article talk page. YOU are harassing people, pasting the same crap on at least 3 admin's pages and two noticeboards. YOU are in trouble, do you understand? Pointing fingers and trying to shift blame to someone else will not prevent your being blocked for the good of Wikipedia. Your willingness to listen, learn, and follow the rules is the only thing that will prevent that. Killer Chihuahua 18:53, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not forget I asked the user today to...Me? I didn't understand. Just revert the unsourced edit which disagree with all of the references--Jjik43 (talk) 18:50, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, let's not forget that. You were edit warring, are you asking to be blocked for it? I can easily do that. Killer Chihuahua 18:53, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For example 1984–85 FIBA European Champions Cup, references: http://todor66.com/basketball/Eurocups/Men_CC_1985.html, https://www.euroleague.net/news/i/11836/european-club-champions-1958-2014, For the Neo Phaliron Velodrome i didn't start the edit war before the edit war begins with unsourced edits, the article wrote https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neo_Phaliron_Velodrome&oldid=867335756, and my last edit is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neo_Phaliron_Velodrome&oldid=915967929 and the other user just remove my edit unsourced--Jjik43 (talk) 18:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are posting evidence against yourself, proving that you broke the policy on edit warring. I ask again, do you want me to block you as hopelessly combative? I can easily do that. Killer Chihuahua 18:59, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe is my bad english, sorry for your time. What I must to do?--Jjik43 (talk) 19:08, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll spare puppy the aggravation of answering you again. What must you do? READ THIS SECTION ON YOUR TALK PAGE. KillerChihuahua has told you, right here, repeatedly, what to do. I have told you the same on my talk page. In simple language: 1) stop arguing with administrators. 2) go to the talk page of the articles you wish to change. 3) start a new discussion section at the bottom of the page. 4) explain why you believe your edits are correct - just as you did on my talk page. Is that clear enough? And don't ask again. Just do it. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:14, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I didn't understand before I will do they today--Jjik43 (talk) 19:22, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vrahomarinaner just insult in greek talk page [5], isn't the first time--Jjik43 (talk) 22:20, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You need to report that to an administrator on the Greek Wikipedia as we have no ability to sanction that behaviour, N.J.A. | talk 10:01, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care isn't the first time in Greek wp this everyday phenomenon--Jjik43 (talk) 12:00, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As tell to admins

As tell to admin Chalk19 as ultralocalists(sorry but is it) don't discussing only insult and tell paranoic things and lies--Jjik43 (talk) 12:03, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trefoil13

For this account, is my mistake to use it, is the old account (non active) of a friend ask her and give me the username and password and i use it. Is a mistake and nothing to do with the edits (revert vandalism). I accept the penalty for this and I will back when block expires. The account I use it to reply to attack by users with trolling behavior, but is the wrong way, and use it for a little, again is a mistake and I accept the penalty for it and I will never user other account again. Jjik43 (talk) 16:26, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The trefoil13 account created years ago from a friend see in Greek Wikipedia [6] --Jjik43 (talk) 18:03, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And to reply to Chalk19 lies the trefoil13 never used for voting in Greek Wikipedia only for comment.--Jjik43 (talk) 18:09, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet 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 sock puppet, 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. N.J.A. | talk 10:05, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

question to an administrator

Hello, i am blocked because i made the silly thing to ask a friend to use her an old account to respond to a personal attack. I want to ask if there are a legal way to continue contribute to wikipedia with a new account and of course i don't make the same mistake again. Thanks for your time if any admin see this--Jjik43 (talk) 10:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]