User talk:Magyarcsaba

Hello Magyarcsaba, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of Contents

Department directory

Need help?

Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.
Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

Article Wizard — a Wizard to help you create articles
The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.
Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia.

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.

Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.

If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Magyarcsaba, good luck, and have fun. --Adrian (talk) 06:15, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Warring

Hi Magyarcsaba, please, avoid engaging in an edit war, for example, with respect to the articles on Bratislava and Košice. Especially, do not violate the three-revert rule. If there is a dispute over a specific edit, be constructive and seek for a solution on the Talk Page. Cheers, KœrteFa {ταλκ} 11:43, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Please could you also inform other users who are violating my additions regarding the Hungarian names of these towns such as Pozsony, Kassa and Újvidék.

Thank you

June 2012

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Novi Sad. 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. WhiteWriter^speaks 13:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You dont understand. The name is not the official name. The official name is Novi Sad. First, the "other names" of the city are enumerated in the RUBRIC - NAME ok. Only one name will mentioned in this case in the introduction, the rest in the rubric NAME. Stop it please. I know which is the name ect. in Novi Sad ok. Why i dont remove the Uvjedik from the rubric NAME???Think a little bit about that.--Nado158 (talk) 19:11, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. 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 text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but 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. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:23, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban

You have been engaged in a persistent pattern of disruptive edit-warring over alternative geographical names across a large number of articles. You returned to this pattern immediately after a prior block. This is made worse by the fact that you lack the writing skills to create reasonable encyclopedic coverage of these issues; for instance, this [1] edit was introducing poorly worded and ungrammatical material in a position of the article where it clearly didn't belong, so even if you were right about the relevance of the name, your edit objectively was seriously degrading to article quality.

Under the authority of the arbitration rulings WP:ARBMAC and WP:ARBEE, I am imposing a topic ban on you now. For the next six months, you are prohibited from making any edits, either to articles or talk pages, that deal with the addition or removal of alternative geographical names in any articles related to Eastern or South-Eastern Europe. You are still welcome to make constructive edits in other areas, but if your edits touch on these issues you will be blocked. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked for a year, for continuing the same behaviour as before, right after coming back from the 6-month topic ban. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:50, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinitely blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. 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 block is for persistent disruptive editing and use of Wikipedia as an ethnic battleground, including while logged out as User:195.89.201.254, User:92.238.171.3, both of which have been repeatedly blocked. For the first twelve months, the following applies:

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked temporarily from editing. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and then appeal your block using the instructions there.

Reminder to administrators: In March 2010, ArbCom adopted a procedure instructing administrators as follows: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped." Administrators who reverse this block without the clear authorisation described in that procedure will be summarily desysopped.

Should you evade this block, the year will reset and your IP adresses will be blocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:28, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]