User talk:PetrusdictusA

Flag of Banat

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Banat, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Mentatus (talk) 12:34, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Banat. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Mentatus (talk) 15:41, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Banat shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Mentatus (talk) 15:41, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Black pride. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been 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 notice boards.
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. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 03:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of arms of Transylvania

I notice that, despite being warned in the past, you are back with wanton removal of sourced text you dislike. Consider this your final warning before I ask administrators to block you for vandalism and POV editing. If you have any grievance with the sources used or the manner presented (though it seems you are allergic to the very mention of views you dislike, no matter how neutrally presented), I suggest you take it to the article talk page. Dahn (talk) 22:07, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You know what? I don't give a shit on your past statements. Go ahead I dare you, and report me! I only deleted a text with no historical basis, nor source, in order to present things correctly. If that bothers you I dont't give a crap!--PetrusdictusA (talk) 05:10, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at List of active separatist movements in Europe‎, you may be blocked from editing. FDW777 (talk) 08:53, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The content putten there is wrong. Banat is not part of Transylvania, the flag shown for Transylvania is actually of Galicia amd Lodomeria, and the regionalist movememts of the Banat are different from those of Transylvania. PetrusdictusA (talk) 16:59, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Banat Republic; 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. The removal of the flag File:Proposed flag of Banat.svg from the article can only be achieved following a consensus in the talk page, see Talk:Banat Republic#Disruptive removal of flag. --T*U (talk) 13:51, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your additions to Banat Republic. Please take your proposed edits to the Talk:Banat Republic and determine a consensus for your proposed edits. Simply repeatedly edit warring and adding your proposed changes is likely to lead to restrictions being placed on your user account. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 20:49, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I already am on Talk:Banat Republic, and have defended my edits. No consensus seams to be reached. All the content I added is sourced, especially the flag, very well sourced. And to us it is a very sensitive topic that a sourced historical flag is being removed, but another flag, sourced in the same way, but with no historical background, and in the colours of a far-right movement is kept. You either remove both flags, or keep them both. You can't ask for consensus to keep one, whilst you remove the other, that's double standard--PetrusdictusA (talk) 21:39, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for a week. I gave very specific guidance which you chose to ignore. Do not edit war.

Next week, please discuss it on the talk page and when there is a consensus then it can be acted upon, though I would not recommend that you be the person who undertakes the edit. Discuss all the edits that are proposed, images in, images out, etc. and the community can come to a consensus. I would heartily recommend that you do not partake of the use of sockpuppets as the consequences of that are severe. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:11, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As far as you continue being biased I'll do what I consider fit. Consecuences? Give me a break!!!!!! So in order to remove far-right flag, which has no historical basis there is need for "consensus", consensus to remove it. Whilst for the historrical and sourced flag there is need for consensus to put it on. So the other way around. You are doing a lot of damage to a historical region you don't even care about, cause as I've said, this is a very sensitive issue to us.PetrusdictusA (talk) 23:56, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PetrusdictusA. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. GeneralNotability (talk) 00:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't give a shit on this. I'll justvopen another one untill you guys get tired. PetrusdictusA (talk) 06:00, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]