User talk:SurrealSurgeon
August 2023
[edit]
Hi SurrealSurgeon! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Joseph Stalin several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.
All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Joseph Stalin, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Use the talk page rather than simply reverting other editors.. —DIYeditor (talk) 16:15, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- I understand. SurrealSurgeon (talk) 17:15, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- Apparently not. —DIYeditor (talk) 18:08, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Joseph Stalin 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. —DIYeditor (talk) 18:08, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
[edit]
You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. If you have questions, please contact me. Mellk (talk) 16:47, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- I understand. SurrealSurgeon (talk) 17:15, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
ANI
[edit]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —DIYeditor (talk) 21:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
August 2023
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 21:48, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
SurrealSurgeon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
You guys confuse me; I follow your advice and try to reach a consensus with others on the article, then you call me "passive-aggressive", "sly", and a "clown". Seriously? I literally took your orders and now you are harassing me with verbal attacks for it? Maybe we got off the wrong foot. Please unblock me, I was just trying to do what you said. Thank you. If possible, you can send me a list of all the rules Wikipedia has so I can better myself as an editor, as I never intended to do any wrong-doings. If you do decide to unblock me, I can personally assure you that nothing bad or negative will come from me ever again. So to conclude, I apologize for my mistakes and wrong-doings as I was just trying to follow your advice. I promise I will behave properly this time.
Decline reason:
You need to address the edit warring. You were warned about it, but did it anyway. While you are blocked you can read WP:PAG. PhilKnight (talk) 07:50, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
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.
is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:34, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- I've revoked TPA because of the user's personal attack (now reverted) on this page.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:56, 23 August 2023 (UTC)