User talk:Krutoi dezigner

Krutoi dezigner, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Krutoi dezigner! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Benzband (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:41, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited M249 light machine gun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PKM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--RAF910 (talk) 21:01, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Hello, I'm Gamaliel. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Comparison of the AK-47 and M16 that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, 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. Gamaliel (talk) 21:34, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked 24 hrs for personal attack

Your edit here describing another editor as:

And yes, he is both psychotic and a borderline autistic.

...violated our policy against personal attacks on other editors. Your response to my comment that followed reinforced the attack rather than retracted it, so I am blocking your editing for 24 hrs.

Please continue the discussion in a civil and collegial manner when the 24 hrs are up. You can argue your case without such attacks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 02:32, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hrs for abuse of editing privileges. 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.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Krutoi dezigner (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The user in question is mentally unfit to edit Wikipedia in a fair and balanced way. I remind you that even admins were banned from Wikipedia for mental episodes. Krutoi dezigner (talk) 02:45, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You seem to be continuing your personal attacks, rather than recognizing the problem. Kuru (talk) 03:12, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

January 2014

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Comparison of the AK-47 and M16. 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, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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. Darkness Shines (talk) 02:44, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You jumped the gun a bit too early - that's my first revert in 24 hours. Krutoi dezigner (talk) 02:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC) ...Also note - giving early warnings may constitute harassment. Krutoi dezigner (talk) 02:48, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One Two. I recommend you read WP:EW Darkness Shines (talk) 02:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your point being? This is my first revert in 24 hours. Krutoi dezigner (talk) 02:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between the three-revert rule and edit warring. You are currently edit warring and you really need to stop and discuss the content civilly. This edit summary and these two edits (especially the "wiki-mommy" commtent) are unacceptable. I agree that some changes need to be made to the text, but you are going about it the absolute wrong way. Calm down and have a civil discussion on the talk page. Trying to force your will on the article against multiple other editors will only lead to you being blocked again. Ish dar ian 03:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the user didn't simply built upon my version, he deleted a ton of sourced content (diff) and then proceeded with even more WP:SYNTH.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_the_AK-47_and_M16&diff=586995797&oldid=585954678 As did you]. You see things one way and others see it differently. Work with other, not against them. Start a conversation on the talk page and explain why you think things should be changed, little by little. Creating an encyclopedia takes time; we have no need to rush. Ish dar ian

He did it first. I merely restored buried but stable version. Krutoi dezigner (talk) 04:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I did work with him on that article, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Comparison_of_the_AK-47_and_M16/Archive_2 and you'll understand what kind of person he is. Krutoi dezigner (talk) 04:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain this edit on Luken094's talk page. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 09:25, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't addressed to you. Krutoi dezigner (talk) 22:30, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...and just found this on the article talk page.

As it was apparently not clear enough before:

This behaviour is unacceptable. It damages the Wikipedia project and community and violates out policy and core values. I have blocked you agsin for a week for repeated personsl attacks after a first block for personal attacks. If this continues the blocks will be made permanent. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 10:43, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abuse of editing privileges. 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.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Krutoi dezigner (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

While I am banned, do me a favour and punish the user for insulting me: diff, diff and diff

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information.--jpgordon^{::==( o )} 20:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Reblocked for a month

You came back immediately to resume edit warring on the comparison article talk page with this talk page edit and edit summary comment.

You are re-blocked for one month. To make this perfectly clear - if you cannot edit in a constructive manner with other editors, you are not welcome here. If you continus this behavior the next step is a permanent block. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:44, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for abuse of editing privileges. 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.

I have reset the one month block and revoked talk page access after the most recent personal attack. This behavior is unacceptable on WIkipedia.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 02:33, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinitely blocked

Your first edit, literally first edit coming back off a month long block for personal attacks, and you resumed edit warring and used an edit summary that was a personal attack.

You are blocked indefinitrly from editing. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:42, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--RAF910 (talk) 01:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]