User talk:Jolly73881

February 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Karpalak ambush, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Synorem (talk) 11:43, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox result

Hello. You should really be more careful. You reverted edits on the Attack on Prekaz without any justification, even though your edit is contrary to WP:MILMOS#INFOBOX. By the way, bullet points are only used for lists. This is pretty much common knowledge. Apart from that, the content you are trying to add is unsupported. The attack did not result in the beginning of the Kosovo War or the re-formation of the KLA. StephenMacky1 (talk) 13:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arbanon coat of arms

The coat of arms speculatively attributed to the Principality of Arbanon has been refuted by conservation specialist Koço Zheku whose findings were published in the scientific periodical "Iliria" in 1984. The person who discovered the coat of arms, Austrian consul Ippen makes no mention of Arbanon whatsoever, when describing the coat of arms. Kj1595 (talk) 18:08, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, Understood. Jolly73881 (talk) 21:55, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caution: Adding unsourced content or misrepresenting sources

Here you claim I "refused to see the source" yet I've looked at the reference you provided and nowhere in the document does it state that more than 65 civilians were killed in the conflict, the majority of whom were Serbs, like you wrote. The only time it mentions casualties in the war is on the first page where it states that "about 100 people were killed", without specifying ethnicity and military vs. civilian.

Wikipedia requires content to be verifiable. If something's not in the source you cite, that information is liable to be removed. Also, you should use a template when citing. Clicking on the cite button above when editing and then on the template button will allow you to fill-in information about the reference(s) you are citing. That way, instead of just adding a link, you can add the page number and a quote which verifies the information you are adding. --Griboski (talk) 16:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be 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 noticeboards.
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. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --Griboski (talk) 15:58, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If a source says something like "the KLA claimed" we can only put it as a claim and not take it as fact unless it's just stated as a fact in reliable sources. The source you added says 15,000-17,000 while the Bartrop reference says 20,000. 24,000 is a claim by the KLA. It's best to stick to what is stated. BTW, these are numbers at their height. There were only about 5,000 at the beginning of the war per the Guardian. --Griboski (talk) 16:07, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The KLA would keep a track of how many troops they have then British new's sources. Jolly73881 (talk) 01:21, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's not how wikipedia works. It's based on reliable sources, independent of the subjects. As a compromise how about we put circa 20,000 in infobox? The Guardian source you added says 15,000 with 5,000 on stand-by. And the source you removed says 20,000. This is something minor to edit-war over. --Griboski (talk) 01:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I showed 2 sources just like you so don't act like your better. Jolly73881 (talk) 02:16, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the Insurgency in Presevo Valley article, if you look under the Aftermath section and "Casualties and displacement" it says "18 members of the Yugoslav security forces were killed and 68 were wounded". Before removing something from the infobox, look if it's mentioned in the body of the article. --Griboski (talk) 01:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bro it's pixels chill out weirdo. Jolly73881 (talk) 02:04, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jolly73881! I just wanted to leave you a message to discuss some concerns that I have regarding your recent comments and responses toward other editors above. These comments are uncivil, and they directly conflict with one of Wikipedia's founding principles. It's a real bummer to see a discussion turn into something like this, and I just don't want to see you get blocked or finding yourself in hot water with the community. I just want to quietly and informally give you a nudge on the shoulder about Wikipedia's civility policy so you can correct this behavior before it leads you into any trouble. I wish you well, and I hope that you'll take this as an opportunity to self-evaluate how you respond and communicate with others, and that you'll do what you need to do in order to keep calm, remain civil, and keep discussions positive and focused toward our primary goal of building an encyclopedia. Thank you for taking the time to read this message, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:58, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Griboski (talk) 04:02, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Kosovo War. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Aoidh (talk) 10:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.. Please discuss your the changes you wish to implement on the talkpage and gain consensus. --Local hero ^talk 15:46, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not reading all of that :). Jolly73881 (talk) 16:28, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:57, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi Jolly73881! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright and Wikipedia

Hello Jolly73881! Your additions to Vratnica Attack have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source. You must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. Read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Our policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:53, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What did I do to you bro. Jolly73881 (talk) 21:02, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Vratnica Attack

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 Vratnica Attack requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vratnica attack. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 18:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at 21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg

G'day Jolly73881. You have been persistently adding a poorly licenced image to the subject Featured article. Despite the content of my edit summaries when I have reverted you indicating the unacceptable licensing, you have continued edit warring t into the article, and you have also failed to engage in discussion about the matter on the talk page per WP:BRD. Unless you took the photograph or have the necessary permissions (of which the obligation is on you to prove), you do not have the right to use it on Wikipedia. Any further edit warring the photograph into the article will result in escalating blocks of you being able to edit. If you want to discuss this further, start a thread at Talk:21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry for doing this and I was shown it by a friend, I will make sure to be more careful next time. Jolly73881 (talk) 08:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]